Nuked from Orbit: A list of NTSC discs that don't respond well to IVTC (sticky?)

[Katie Boundary]

This thread exists for the purpose of compiling a list of problematic Region 1 DVDs and ways to deal with them, with "problematic" in this case meaning "not encoded as >99% FILM and not restorable to film by the textbook match-and-decimate method", and "deal with" meaning "retrieve non-interlaced, non-blended content from without changing the playback speed or running time"

The first attempt at creating such a list suffered from 4 pages of nonstop derailments before it had to be put out of its misery. Similar derailments will not be tolerated this time around.

This is intended to be a perpetual work in progress. Suggested additions are not just welcome, but expected.

Title: Alex Mack, The Secret World of
Diagnosis: Live-action content was shot at 24p; CGI was done at 30p; some effects were done at 60i; some live-action content is 48i. Encoded as 100% hard NTSC. It's basically an orphanarium.
Treatment: separate the fields. Apply decimation and resizing as needed depending on the field-separation filter used. Do NOT decimate the frame rate to under 29.97 fps.

Title: Andromeda, Gene Roddenberry's
Diagnosis: Live-action content was shot at 24p; CGI was done at a variety of frame rates including 24p, 30p, and 48i; fades-ins/outs, compositing, and other effects were done at up to 60i. Encoded as a mix of film and hard NTSC. It's basically an orphanarium. Rommie's holographic banding effects play havoc with field-matching filters.
Treatment: separate the fields. Apply decimation and resizing as needed depending on the field-separation filter used. Decimating the frame rate to under 29.97 fps is not recommended, but can be done without noticeable skipping. Alternatively, the episodes can be encoded as variable-framerate files.

Title: Batman Beyond
Diagnosis: Varies by episode. Most episodes were animated at 24 fps, but the pilot was done at 30, and other episodes may have been as well. The intro was done as a mix of 24 and 30 fps, with a few orphaned fields thrown in just for fun, and even many of the intro's "progressive" frames were drawn to look combed, as revealed by applying separatefields() followed by doubleweave(). The WB logo prior to the into fades in and out at 60i, with Bugs Bunny animated at 30 fps. Encoded as 100% hard NTSC.
Treatment: No field-matching filter is smart enough to make sense of this content. Separate the fields. Apply decimation and resizing as needed depending on the field-separation filter used. Decimating the frame rate to under 29.97 fps is not recommended, but DEPENDING ON THE EPISODE, it can be done without noticeable skipping. Alternatively, if you can remove the intro (which some utilities might allow you to do), then field-matching is the way to go.

Title: Babylon 5
Diagnosis: live-action content shot at 24p; CGI rendered at 30p; the few shots including both were composited at 60i. Encoded as 100% hard NTSC.
Treatment: separate the fields. Apply decimation and resizing as needed depending on the field-separation filter used. Do NOT decimate the frame rate to under 29.97 fps.

Title: Birds of Prey
Diagnosis: The short version: lots of 60i stuff. Encoded as 100% hard NTSC I'll elaborate when I have the chance to look at the DVDs again.
Treatment: separate the fields. Apply decimation and resizing as needed depending on the field-separation filter used. Do NOT decimate the frame rate to under 29.97 fps.

Title: Buffy the Vampire Slayer
Diagnosis: the opening credits include 30p content. Additionally, first-season episodes start with a ten-second or so blurb explaining the premise, which includes about 3 or 4 layers of 24p content all composited together at 60i. A few of the special effects in the episodes themselves were done at 30p or faster.
Treatment: for season 1, it's separate-interpolate-decimate. For seasons 2 and onward, you can safely field-match. Don't decimate below 29.97 fps unless you excise the opening credits (they are their own chapter).

Title: Where on Earth is Carmen Sandiego?
Diagnosis: full-blown 60i CGI, of the "literally nothing but orphaned fields" variety.
Treatment: separate the fields. Apply decimation and resizing as needed depending on the field-separation filter used. Do NOT decimate the frame rate to under 29.97 fps.

Title: Darkwing Duck
Diagnosis: the animation itself, including nearly all fades and other transitions, was done at 24p. However, the title cards fade in and out at 60i. Oddly, the episodes are encoded as something like 90-98% hard NTSC interspersed with random tiny bits of film, rather than vice versa.
Treatment: match fields and decimate down to 23.976 fps. How you get rid of the vestigial combing is up to you; resize, do a vertical blur, whatever.

Title: Scrubs
Diagnosis: Nearly all of this show was done at 24 fps. However, the opening title sequence was done at 30 fps. Additionally, the "flash" effects and some fades, including the credit fade-ins and fade-outs after the title sequence, were done at 60i.
Treatment: Fades and flashes are basically just blended frames anyway, so the damage here isn't too bad. Just match fields. Decimating the frame rate to under 29.97 fps is not recommended, but can be done without noticeable skipping. How you get rid of the vestigial combing is up to you; resize, do a vertical blur, whatever.

Title: Sonic the Hedgehog
Diagnosis: most of the animation, including most of the intro, was animated at 24 fps. However, a few shots in the intro incorporate 60i effects or were animated at slightly different frame rates, yielding different duplication patterns that cannot be easily decimated. The intro also has orphaned fields outside of the 60i effects.
Treatment: For season 1 episodes, you're stuck with separate-interpolate-decimate. Do NOT decimate the frame rate to under 29.97 fps. On the second-season episodes, however, the intro is its own chapter, so if they're ripped without that chapter, then they can be safely field-matched and decimated down to 23.976 fps.

Title:
Diagnosis:
Treatment:

Title:
Diagnosis:
Treatment:

Title:
Diagnosis:
Treatment:

I plan to go through all of the following in the course of composing this list:

https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13096090_1682166275381161_2668067833438133550_n.jpg?oh=6fe44bde85b32f042b906b7e56fea12d&oe=57B14288

If a mod could put that in this forum's equivalent of spoiler tags, that would be great.

[hello_hello]

What's the point of a list when the same method is recommended every time?
"Separate the fields. Apply decimation and resizing as needed depending on the field-separation filter used."

I guess it'd be foolish to dismiss something without trying it first.

Progressive animation:
http://s31.postimg.org/pofiwtm4b/before1.jpg

After separating the fields, applying decimation and resizing as needed:
http://s31.postimg.org/b4coqlc8r/after1.jpg

After Bob(), no resizing required:
http://s31.postimg.org/3vv9nl9a3/after1b.jpg

Of course you'd go out of your way to avoid de-interlacing progressive video, but for a damage comparison,
Yadif deinterlacing, no resizing required:
https://cdn.pbrd.co/images/tuPV9Or.jpg

Interlaced video (not de-interlaced):
http://s31.postimg.org/xi3pz44l7/before2.jpg

After separating the fields, applying decimation and resizing as needed:
http://s31.postimg.org/je10bn7sr/after2.jpg

After Bob(), no resizing required:
http://s31.postimg.org/6721zvhvf/after2b.jpg

Yadif deinterlacing, no resizing required:
https://cdn.pbrd.co/images/tvhsWlf.jpg

Batman Beyond
Diagnosis: Most of the animation was done at 30p. However, parts of the opening were done at up to 60i, leaving several orphaned fields.
Treatment: separate the fields. Apply decimation and resizing as needed depending on the field-separation filter used.

It's beyond comprehension. Take something that's predominantly 30fps progressive (allegedly), separate the fields, apply decimation, then use what's left to output 30p again.
It's just an idea, but if the problem's only parts of the opening section, allegedly leaving unloved fields, might there be a way to de-interlace the 60i part.... errrr.... sorry.... I mean, separate the fields, decimate and resize as needed.... but encode the rest as progressive, without having to make a mess of it by separating the fields, applying decimation or resizing?

Edit: The Yadif screenshots are hosted on a different site than the others as postimage.org was having a moment, so I don't know if they'll all stay up for the same amount of time.

[manono]

(sticky?)
Not a chance.
...with "problematic" in this case meaning "not encoded as >99% FILM and not restorable to film by the textbook match-and-decimate method"...
What's the point? As long as it's an NTSC-compliant DVD, you have no case. Is true interlace (shot using video cameras) supposed to be 99% film? Are the hybrids supposed to be 99% film. If you think even film sources are supposed to be encoded using soft telecine (progressive 23.976fps with 3:2 pulldown flags), then you live in a dream world. I rarely see such things myself and almost all that I work on are movies. They're mostly field-blended. They were never telecined to begin with and can't be IVTC'd. I could mention a thousand of them and you want to compile a comprehensive list of 'problematic' NTSC DVDs?

If for DVD, keep it interlaced and encode it as-is if you can't figure out anything better to do with it. If for something else then bob it with a good bobber, and not the ones you've recently discussed. If you have a problem DVD you don't know how to handle, then maybe ask in the AviSynth forum. Provide a short ten-second sample from the source and there's sure to be someone to offer suggestions.

Other than that, I don't really see how this thread will ever help anyone with anything. But, have fun. :)

[wonkey_monkey]

Similar derailments will not be tolerated this time around.

You don't get to decide what is and is not a derailment, nor can you do anything about it.

This is intended to be a perpetual work in progress. Suggested additions are not just welcome, but expected.

Expected? Now you sound like you're issuing edicts to forum members.

Treatment: separate the fields... separate the fields... separate the fields... separate the fields... separate the fields...

No, no, no, no, no.

As has already been explained to you several times, and ably demonstrated by hello_hello, this is a terrible idea (it doesn't matter that you haven't specifically named separatefields() - "I meant use EEDI3 or something!" won't work as a defence) and I urge anyone reading this thread not to do any such thing.

[Katie Boundary]

I will continue to work on this project with or without your help. However, you should keep in mind that, if you do, you wouldn't be helping me so much as you'd be helping every noob out there who just tried to IVTC something and got garbage as a result.

What's the point?

To serve as a map/guide for newbies who don't yet know that READFAG's "telecide and decimate" method isn't the say-all, end-all of killing non-film content.

Is true interlace (shot using video cameras) supposed to be 99% film?

As opposed to what? Shot using a banana phone?

If you think even film sources are supposed to be encoded using soft telecine (progressive 23.976fps with 3:2 pulldown flags), then you live in a dream world. I rarely see such things myself

I have plenty. Gargoyles and Kim Possible are both pretty clean, only dipping into native or hard NTSC during the opening or closing credits. Transformers Prime is soft telecine. Battlestar Galactica, Firefly, Defiance, Gotham, and tons of other sci-fi shows from the past decade or two are soft telecine. Several other shows, including Farscape and most of the Stargates and Star Treks, are mostly soft telecine, only going hard or native NTSC for special effects sequences and credits. Captain Planet is a haphazard mess, with episodes being anywhere from 100% NTSC to 99.1% film.

Let me put it this way: if I were to stack my entire DVD library like books, organized alphabetically, the "A through B" section alone would be as tall as I am (ADV's packaging practices are partly to blame, but still...). I've seen a LOT of this stuff. The REAL mystery is why the hell the opening credits of Star Trek: the Motion Picture are hard NTSC.

They're mostly field-blended. They were never telecined to begin with and can't be IVTC'd. I could mention a thousand of them and you want to compile a comprehensive list of 'problematic' NTSC DVDs?

Yes.

If for something else then bob it with a good bobber, and not the ones you've recently discussed.

I avoided naming specific filters in this thread for a very good reason: to prevent people from getting distracted and starting completely irrelevant arguments.

[hello_hello]

I will continue to work on this project with or without your help. However, you should keep in mind that, if you do, you wouldn't be helping me so much as you'd be helping every noob out there who just tried to IVTC something and got garbage as a result.

You're not helping anyone.
As has been pointed out by every single person who posted in your other thread, and now this one, you have no idea what you're doing.

To serve as a map/guide for newbies who don't yet know that READFAG's "telecide and decimate" method isn't the say-all, end-all of killing non-film content.

And how does it work according to your guide?
"telecide and decimate" or "separate the fields, apply decimation and resizing as needed". Ridiculous.

As opposed to what? Shot using a banana phone?

He was trying to point out you can't IVTC interlaced video, which is what you get from an NTSC video camera. That doesn't make it bad DVD content. It's certainly not "problematic" simply because it can't be IVTC'd. It's perfectly normal and it needs to be encoded interlaced, or de-interlaced, and not by "separate the fields, apply decimation and resizing as needed", which has been proven to you with screenshots is damn stupid, yet still you persist.

I avoided naming specific filters in this thread for a very good reason: to prevent people from getting distracted and starting completely irrelevant arguments.

Nonsense. You simply don't know what you're talking about.
You've argued against de-interlacing in previous threads because apparently that's evil while the artefacts and jagged lines that go with "separate the fields, apply decimation and resizing as needed" are somehow fine.

"Separate the fields. Apply decimation and resizing as needed depending on the field-separation filter used".

How do you de-interlace video when you've decimated fields?
Deinterlacing combines fields, it doesn't separate them as such.
You can't suggest butchering the video then offer an excuse for not naming specific filtering as though you didn't. It doesn't work that way.

[lansing]

I think the op is trying to mimic the double rate deinterlacer routine by separate fields and then resize it back to the original size, added a decimator in between to take out dupe frames. But I don't think that's how a deinterlacer works, and your routine is not going to work.

The first problem is that by decimating, you're going to end up with a clip of variable frame rate. How do you determine when the frame rate change from 24fps to 30fps? How do you declare frame rate for sections that's a hybrid of 24fps+30fps contents?

The 2nd problem, if the original clip was shot at 24fps and encoded as NTSC (3 progressive + 2 interlaced), you'll need to ivtc. Applying separate field is going to destroy that 3 progressive frames.

hello_hello have done screen shot comparisons on how your method is going to break progress frames, hence it even break frames that are listed as interlace.

[Katie Boundary]

I think the op is trying to mimic the double rate deinterlacer routine by separate fields and then resize it back to the original size

I never specified "original size", and this is in fact an inappropriate thing to do in most cases.

added a decimator in between to take out dupe frames. But I don't think that's how a deinterlacer works, and your routine is not going to work.

It works just fine every time I've tried it.

The first problem is that by decimating, you're going to end up with a clip of variable frame rate.

Not really. Depending on the source and your decimation preferences, you'll either get 24 fps footage with a few missing frames, 30 fps footage with a lot of duplicate frames, or 60 fps footage in which most of the frames are duplicates or triplicates. Creating variable-framerate video is beyond the scope and intent of this guide.

How do you determine when the frame rate change from 24fps to 30fps?

I manually go through the deinterlaced footage frame by frame in Virtualdub, but what relevance does that have?

How do you declare frame rate for sections that's a hybrid of 24fps+30fps contents?

That's a good question to which I'd love to know the answer. Maybe you should ask in a more relevant thread.

The 2nd problem, if the original clip was shot at 24fps and encoded as NTSC (3 progressive + 2 interlaced), you'll need to ivtc. Applying separate field is going to destroy that 3 progressive frames.

As already stated, this thread is dedicated to video sources for which that approach simply does not work as intended.

hello_hello have done screen shot comparisons on how your method is going to break progress frames, hence it even break frames that are listed as interlace.

hello_hello has a bad history of not understanding basic English, and therefore criticizing things that have nothing to do with what I actually said. That's why he/she is on my ignore list.

[hello_hello]

hello_hello has a bad history of not understanding basic English, and therefore criticizing things that have nothing to do with what I actually said. That's why he/she is on my ignore list.

You're pretending to ignore me because for you, it's the forum equivalent of "bum up, head in the sand".

Your petty insults and continued lying aside, you said:

Title: Batman Beyond
Diagnosis: Most of the animation was done at 30p. However, parts of the opening were done at up to 60i, leaving several orphaned fields. Encoded as 100% hard NTSC.
Treatment: separate the fields. Apply decimation and resizing as needed depending on the field-separation filter used. Do not reduce the frame rate below 29.97 fps.

And I replied with screenshots showing you exactly what happens when you separate and resize the individual fields of progressive animation.
Almost unbelievably, you asked about the mess you were making when separating and resizing progressive fields yourself over a year ago (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=171851), then apparently popped your head back in the sand again and it's been there ever since. The problem's not my understanding of English, the problem's your lack of understanding of almost everything else.

Your thought process is dumbfounding. If straight lines in an image are angled (45 degrees for example) and you remove every second scan line, the lines in the image are going to consist of "stair steps" instead of being straight. How can they not.... unless you reduce the resolution to VCD compliance and encode with mpeg1 to hide it?

[Katie Boundary]

"Scrubs" has been added to the list.

[hello_hello]

Please no, don't butcher Scrubs.

Title: Scrubs
Diagnosis: Nearly all of this show was done at 24 fps. However, the opening title sequence was done at 30 fps. Additionally, the "flash" effects and some fades, including the credit fade-ins and fade-outs after the title sequence, were done at 60i.
Treatment: Fades and flashes are basically just blended frames anyway, so the damage here isn't too bad. Just match fields and don't decimate. How you get rid of the vestigial combing is up to you; resize, do a vertical blur, whatever.

Oh dear.... we've got 24fps progressive sections and 30fps progressive/interlaced sections, so I assume only applying field matching would leave the prominently 24fps parts at 30fps with one frame in five being a duplicate, while potentially making a mess of the 30fps sections.
It's sounds like a job for a smart IVTC filter. Field match and decimate the telecined parts, de-interlace the 60i parts and convert the 30fps sections to 24fps using frame blending, given there's already frame blending present for those sections. Or you might be able to IVTC the telecined parts and deblend the 30fps /60i parts back to 24fps too, assuming that's how they began life, reversing the existing blending rather than creating more of it..... if you were quite keen.... but it's impossible to tell without a sample, or to know how Katie is opening the video for analysis, or whether pulldown flags are being honoured during the process etc.... but even without knowing, the recommended method of handling it sounds like bad advice.

[Katie Boundary]

Darkwing Duck has been added to the list. Birds of Prey has been expanded to most of what it will eventually say.

[Motenai Yoda]

please stop! don't do this to yourself

[hello_hello]

Darkwing Duck has been added to the list. Birds of Prey has been expanded to most of what it will eventually say.

Title: Darkwing Duck
Diagnosis: the animation itself, including nearly all fades and other transitions, was done at 24p. However, the title cards fade in and out at 60i. Oddly, the episodes are encoded as something like 90-98% hard NTSC interspersed with random tiny bits of film, rather than vice versa.
Treatment: match fields and decimate down to 23.976 fps. How you get rid of the vestigial combing is up to you; resize, do a vertical blur, whatever.

Once again, assuming Katie's analyses is miraculously accurate... because the only 60i sections being where the titles fade in and out seems unlikely... de-interlacing those 60i sections and then converting their frame rate to 24fps would probably be more sensible, as it'll leave no residual combing that forces you to resize or blur the video (according to the gospel of Katie) and any frame blending resulting from the frame rate conversion would probably be less offensive.

[wonkey_monkey]

Could we have this thread locked? Because a) it's woefully ill-informed, as proven by hello_hello; b) Katie Boundary seems likely to keep bumping it even if no-one else ever responds; c) it's caused nothing but trouble since its inception.

[StainlessS]

No, do not close this thread. !

Me and Katie have decided to go off and have some little raptors together, (well if she aint, its only a little bit of persuasion, she is mine)

What you say Katie, me & you or what ?

(seriously, girls are OK, but would you wanna spend the rest of you life with one, when you could spend it with ME).)

(I promise, I would trim my toe nails, really, truly, on purpose !)

[Katie Boundary]

please stop! don't do this to yourself

This is a project to which I have committed, and I will continue it indefinitely regardless of what happens to this thread. The entire Internet could go dark and I'd still continue my analysis, if for no other reason than my own future use.

I have caused nothing but trouble since its inception.

Fixed.

girls are OK, but would you wanna spend the rest of you life with one

Preferably more than one ;)

EDIT: Sonic the Hedgehog has been added. The diagnosis for Batman Beyond has been slightly refined based on a much more thorough analysis.

[raffriff42]

This is a project to which I have committed, and I will continue it indefinitely regardless of what happens to this thread.Your project (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolling) has been quite successful so far.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

In Internet slang, a troll is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory [e.g, hilariously incorrect], extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, often for their own amusement.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/2qcau3791snb5il/Trolling-Not-to-play.png?raw=1

[Groucho2004]

This is a project to which I have committed, and I will continue it indefinitely regardless of what happens to this thread. The entire Internet could go dark and I'd still continue my analysis, if for no other reason than my own future use.
I can picture it - K-T Boundary, dwelling in a forsaken place analysing screwed up DVD transfers and writing scathing notes. Ignore his findings at your own peril.

[Reel.Deel]

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/108089426/screenshots/Trolling-Not-to-play.png

Indeed, perfect example here: http://www.imagemagick.org/discourse-server/viewtopic.php?t=27337

[Katie Boundary]

Indeed, perfect example here: http://www.imagemagick.org/discourse-server/viewtopic.php?t=27337

As an "example" of my trolling, you point to a thread proving that my interest in such a filter is sincere?

http://www.troll.me/images/futurama-fry/not-sure-if-sarcasm-or-just-really-stupid.jpg

[WorBry]

I don't think anyone is being sarcastic, and the image you have just posted only reinforces that perception. Really, that is how you come across.

[Reel.Deel]

As an "example" of my trolling, you point to a thread proving that my interest in such a filter is sincere?

insert cute meme here

That link is not an example of your trolling, it's an example of when trolling ceases to exist due to the fact that nobody replied. I was simply agreeing with raffriff42. Feel free to twist it anyway you want, whatever, makes no difference to me.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/108089426/screenshots/Trolling-Not-to-play.png

[johnmeyer]

I do video restoration for a living. People send me Kinescopes and old videos that are usually somewhat rare, and have often been "fixed" somewhere along the way (I seldom get to deal with 2" quad or the original film).

When I get these videos that have been borked, I always wonder, "who the heck got hold of this video and did all these horrible things to ruin it?"

I now have my answer.

[Katie Boundary]

That link is not an example of your trolling

On that, we agree.

[Katie Boundary]

I happened to be combing through some B5 episodes today and noticed something very interesting: in the CGI parts, even properly field-matched frames have a weird pseudo-interlacing. It's most obvious when looking at the stars.

I stumbled upon this discovery while attempting to find a series of filters that would, in addition to creating a ton of garbage frames, would yield all possible correct matches for fields in addition to bob-deinterlacing all orphaned fields. Then I noticed just how impossible it would be to create a perfect video stream even if I had infinite time and all possible frames to cherry-pick from. 60i credit fade-ins and fade-outs, or other 60i effects, against a 30p or 24p background force a difficult choice: if these clips are treated as sequences of orphaned fields, then the background gets bobbed when it would look better field-matched. If these clips are treated as progressive footage and field-matched, then the 60i stuff stays combed. Obviously, this first option is less problematic for the CGI.

I also noticed something weird when combing through Buffy episodes, which I will add to the list shortly.

[hello_hello]

I happened to be combing through some B5 episodes today and noticed something very interesting: in the CGI parts, even properly field-matched frames have a weird pseudo-interlacing. It's most obvious when looking at the stars.

I've noticed you have a weird tendency to ignore request after request for a sample of the source so we can all see what you're allegedly seeing.

How about a sample?

[manono]

If these clips are treated as progressive footage and field-matched, then the 60i stuff stays combed.
Any decent field matcher, such as the ones included in Decomb and TIVTC, has post-processors (deinterlacers) included to take care of any residual interlacing.

And as hello_hello suggests, samples would be useful.

[Katie Boundary]

Any decent field matcher, such as the ones included in Decomb and TIVTC, has post-processors (deinterlacers) included to take care of any residual interlacing.

Actually, this was confirmed using separatefields() followed by Doubleweave(), just to be sure that it wasn't the result of doing something outrageously stupid like accidentally inverting the field parity or weaving two interpolated fields together. This is not "residual" interlacing caused by finding a bad match for an orphaned field. This was baked into the images back when they were first rendered.

samples would be useful.

I had already grabbed these images for a different reason, so they're not necessarily the best at demonstrating what I'm talking about, but they were handy...

Frame 16941:

https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13501937_1703292816601840_2754771622793538445_n.jpg?oh=d919ebb9263779fbacedaf6105690af2&oe=57C5C213

Frame 16942:

https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13516536_1703292809935174_4299870959289910739_n.jpg?oh=943e1b11ebefeaf4cf54f68a74783cec&oe=57C13904

Frame 16943:

https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13466382_1703292803268508_3635311907542161267_n.jpg?oh=55c3eff1b2224cfaa971992def816c78&oe=57DC4A11

Note that in the middle image, which is the same image that TFM(pp=0) gives you, the stars are still combed. Do you want to know what the REALLY weird part is, though? The "missing" parts of the stars don't exist in any other fields. As the video progresses, the missing parts of the stars just stay missing, instead of jumping between top and bottom fields at 30 hz.

EDIT: here's the Agamemnon (from the episode "Points of Departure", frame 2150 if using separatefields+doubleweave or 1075 if using TFM). Note that even though most of the movement is from left to right, it's the vertical or nearly vertical lines that look fine and the near-horizontal ones that are outrageously screwed up... https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13501893_1703300489934406_2462907184234802255_n.jpg?oh=91138ba7802835845033ec90e206884c&oe=57E4F4A2

Also, I feel the need to emphasize that the live-action parts do not suffer this issue, even though they're hard-telecined...

[hello_hello]

Someone else should try explaining to Katie the difference between a sample and a screenshot. I've given it a go a few times with no result but maybe someone else will have more luck.

At a guess, much of Katie's issue is her refusal to let any filtering do it's job... ie TFM(pp=0).... but I'm far from an NTSC expert.

[StainlessS]

Katie,
In DGIndex, mark a section of about 20 -> 30 secs with movement, using the Start '[' and End ']' buttons.
Then select File Menu, "Save Project and Demux Video".
Upload the result m2v to eg MediaFire or SendSpace.

[Katie Boundary]

MediaFire or SendSpace.

Will that require creating an account?

[StainlessS]

Will that require creating an account?

MediaFire Yes, SendSpace, I dont think so, but perhaps others can verify. (I have account on each, no problem to set up either, both free).

EDIT: Can take a peek at both of my accounts below in my sig.

[hello_hello]

Surely it can't be that hard for Katie to type "file upload" into a Google search and check a few links. None of these require an account.

http://www.filedropper.com/
http://www.megafileupload.com/
http://www.tinyupload.com/
https://www.wetransfer.com/

[johnmeyer]

If the account is free, so what does it matter???

You obviously created an account in order to post in this forum, so it can't be the concept of first having to register before using something. Signing up for MediaFire is exactly the same thing.

MediaFire is a really good service, and I highly recommend that you use it, not only because you will find it easier to use than some of the others, but also because it is a lot "friendlier" to people in this forum who then try to download your video. Some of these other services are a little sleezy in the ways in which they try to trick you into first downloading a "helper" app before you can download. You don't have to do this, because all them provide browser download capability, but it is easy to get tricked.

[StainlessS]

@Hello, Hello, chill bro. You need tyke take some time.

Katie, waiting for your renditian.

Keep it cool chaps:)

[StainlessS]

Also, If I may. Some of the guys that have given their time are less than wrong, please give them due consideration/

Edit by manono: Removed some stuff you wrote. Are you drunk? :, given my treatment by you, I sure feel like I shoud be :)

[Groucho2004]

Are you drunk?
Brexit eve celebrations?

[StainlessS]

Brexit eve celebrations?

Nah, that was not posted by me, I'm just the victim of it.

Forgot what brexit stuff is, i'm sure it's important, just not to me. :)

EDIT: Manono, I feel justly chastised, although I dont have a clue why. (cant remember what goodies I wrote, musta been good to get you off your back).

EDIT:
Thunder and lightning outside my window, I need a cuddle, what you say Manono, wanna givvus a cuddle. (thought not).
I'm' scared, ooh goodness there it goes again (we're all gonna die).

[Groucho2004]

Manono, I feel justly chastised, although I dont have a clue why. (cant remember what goodies I wrote, musta been good to get you off your back).

EDIT:
Thunder and lightning outside my window, I need a cuddle, what you say Manono, wanna givvus a cuddle. (thought not).
I'm' scared, ooh goodness there it goes again.
I want some of what you're smoking.

[StainlessS]

Dont smoke no more, me is doin them there vape things, not very interesting but given a real ciggy, is really disappointing,
kinda a bit of an anti-climax. No more real ciggies for me. EDIT: About mid July, 1 year for me.

[hello_hello]

@Hello, Hello, chill bro. You need tyke take some time.

I'm chilled, but asking if sites require an account seems like classic avoidance to me, so I offered a list to help move the discussion along to the next diversion.

Maybe you're not aware this is hardly the first request for a sample. Most of which were simply ignored, or as was the case here, a screenshot offered instead.
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1769916#post1769916
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1769944#post1769944
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1770081#post1770081
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1770185#post1770185

[StainlessS]

Perhaps Katie was not aware of how to accomplish such.Now she is an hopefully all of your dreams will come true.
(I got this weird stuff running around my brain, about staying alive to one hundred and five, dreams could come true,
it could happen to you when you're young at heart), drivin me nuts.

EDIT: Musta been in a recent movie I've seen.

[johnmeyer]

(I got this weird stuff running around my brain, about staying alive to one hundred and five, dreams could come true, it could happen to you when you're young at heart), drivin me nuts.I'm almost 2/3 of the way there. Not all it's cracked up to be (living a long time). I look at Jaggar and Richards -- 24/7 drugs and five women a day -- and think my clean living may not have been such a good choice: they look great, and seem to have ten times the energy I have.

[hello_hello]

Perhaps Katie was not aware of how to accomplish such.Now she is an hopefully all of your dreams will come true.

Fortunately experience taught me not to hold my breath, although I thought asking for samples would just result in the standard avoidance techniques (asking how to do upload them, then ignoring the request etc) rather abandoning the thread for a while. Or maybe that's just co-incidence.....

[manono]

...they look great, and seem to have ten times the energy I have.
Kind of discouraging, isn't? On the other hand, they're the exceptions. Look at all the hard-living rockers who died at age 27.

[johnmeyer]

Kind of discouraging, isn't? On the other hand, they're the exceptions. Look at all the hard-living rockers who died at age 27.True:

The 27 Club (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/27_Club)

In some ways though, they were the lucky ones. Some, like Brian Wilson of the Beach Boys fried their brains and had to live the rest of their lives as a member of the vegetable family.

[Sharc]

True:

The 27 Club (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/27_Club)

In some ways though, they were the lucky ones. Some, like Brian Wilson of the Beach Boys fried their brains and had to live the rest of their lives as a member of the vegetable family.
Orphaned fields or pulldown patterns, that's the question .... :p