Cutting a Video for demonstration

[emdiem]

Im editing a musicvideo to fit its new audiocontent for a demonstration and I have the vob file for the original mix.

What i've done is to speed up the video and audio to the BPM of the new version for the songs. Well I'm working with Sonic Foundry Vegas and belive its a perfect tool for me, mainly becouse I work almost everyday in some way with another product of theirs (Acid Pro)

To this point i renderd an mpeg2 DVD PAL standard file with conctant bitrate of 8 000 000 (a bit overtake?)

Wile i babble with the numbers here I feel that the outtake of this render is a bit blur and perhaps motionmahsed. I dont know if I got the interlace right either. What codec this program use i dont know and i have'nt seen a way to choose my own external codec for this render, but I guess its Sony or something.

I have cutt a sample of the video into a 32mb mpeg2 file and if someone would like to watch it and say whats wrong ,or if its all correct, please send a reply and i can setup this file on a server for you to download.


I have posted on the forum at Sonic Foundry and no real help is given there =/


EDIT:

I made screenshots over the rendersettigns, if thats to any help.

http://www.digital-media.nu/videosettings/advanced_audio.gif
http://www.digital-media.nu/videosettings/audio.gif
http://www.digital-media.nu/videosettings/system.gif
http://www.digital-media.nu/videosettings/video.gif


This is the setting the vob file that I got have:
http://www.digital-media.nu/videosettings/videoproperties.gif


These are the settigns over the project:
http://www.digital-media.nu/videosettings/deinterlace.gif
http://www.digital-media.nu/videosettings/motion.gif


Regards
Michael

[Amnon82]

K, Michael.

Upload it we will have a look...:D

Your settings seems to be OK. So we need the sample.

[emdiem]

Okey, so no fuzzy in the settigns, cool.

I havent calibrated my monitor and the colors are so thick and extreme, on the red parts .. but only with videofiles, but on the TV later when burned its okey so I guess thats nothing i should tuch.

Here is the file located:

http://www.clubparadize.nu/_bak/videosample.m2v
31,20mb

[Amnon82]

I checked Your m2v-file. Something went wrong at encoding. It crashed my system working with this file. I fixed the header of the file. So I could open it.

This source of the file is NTSC. Now You created a interlanced PAL file. Generaly is PAL progressiv. This is why it comes blury. I tried some Encoder of mine to check it. DRPEncXP 0.51 showed me severial errors in the file. Then I tried it with my newest build DRPEncXP MEncoder Editon 1.0. This one acepted the file after some tweaking. I took 3500 as min Bitrate. 8000 as avr. Bitrate and 9500 as max. Bitrate. Added my matrix and checked deinterlance in the Encoder-Options.

After encoding (2Pass Mode) I got a 14 MB file. On every reencode You lost quality. Thats fact. Interlanced Source is for PAL always not good. Here a little backround about NTSC standard and PAL standard:

NTSC

NTSC is the U.S. standard that was adopted in 1941 as the first standardized television broadcasting and video format that is still in use. NTSC stands for National Television Standards Committee and was approved by the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) as the standard for television broadcasting in the U.S.

NTSC is based on a 525-line, 60 fields/30 frames-per-second at 60Hz system for transmission and display of video images. This is an interlaced system in which each frame is scanned in two fields of 262 lines, which is then combined to display a frame of video with 525 scan lines.

This system works fine, but one drawback is that color TV broadcasting and display was not part of the equation when the system was first approved. A dilemma arose as to how to incorporate Color with NTSC without making the millions of B/W televisions in use by the early 1950's obsolete. Finally, a standardization for adding Color to the NTSC system was adopted in 1953. However, the implementation of color into the NTSC format has been a weakness of the system, thus the term for NTSC became known by many professionals as "Never Twice The Same Color". Ever notice that color quality and consistency varies quite a bit between stations?

NTSC is the official analog video standard in the U.S., Canada, Mexico, some parts of Central and South America, Japan, Taiwan, and Korea.

PAL

PAL is the dominant format in the World for analog television broadcasting and video display (sorry U.S.) and is based on a 625 line, 50 field/25 frames a second, 50HZ system. The signal is interlaced, like NTSC into two fields, composed of 312 lines each. Several distinguishing features are one: a better overall picture than NTSC because of the increased amount of scan lines. Two: since color was part of the standard from the beginning, color consistency between stations and TVs are much better. There is a down side to PAL however, since there are fewer frames (25) displayed per second, sometimes you can notice a slight flicker in the image, much like the flicker seen on projected film.

Since PAL and its variations have such world domination, it has been nicknamed "Peace At Last", by those in the video professions. Countries on the PAL system include the U.K., Germany, Spain, Portugal, Italy, China, India, most of Africa, and the Middle East.

Here are some screenshots:

Frame4 of the Source (http://rj-elektronik.de/avideo/files/mcp/fram4org.jpg) In this Screenshot You can see the overlap of two pictures.

Frame331 of the Source (http://rj-elektronik.de/avideo/files/mcp/frame331org.jpg) On this dancing people You can see that all is blury.

Frame532 of the Source (http://rj-elektronik.de/avideo/files/mcp/frame532.jpg) This is the singer I think. Unsharp!

And here the Screenshots of my reencode:
(Frames changed, but they are the same pictures)

Frame18 of the ReEncode (http://rj-elektronik.de/avideo/files/mcp/Frame18drp.jpg) In this Screenshot You can see the overlap of two pictures, but now it is clear.

Frame344 of the ReEncode (http://rj-elektronik.de/avideo/files/mcp/frame344drp.jpg) On this dancing people. Still blury but clearer.

Frame546 of the ReEncode (http://rj-elektronik.de/avideo/files/mcp/frame546drp.jpg) This is the singer I think. Now it is fixed!

And of course the ReEncode:

Download the ReEncode (13.38 MB) (http://rj-elektronik.de/avideo/files/mcp/avisdvd2.m2v)

[emdiem]

This is confusing couse the vob file is PAL

hmm.. strange, wonder where the problem enters. will look at it, and yes your shots was way better than mine.

I cant choose encoder with Vegas so I have to use its own =/

[emdiem]

update:

This mpeg looks bad on a monitor due that its interlaced, but shall I not make the mpegfile interlaced? Its to be on a DVD and the TV must have it interlaced, or have i missunderstod it all what i have read about this?

I know that to have it look good on a pc monitor i have to deinterlace it. In Vegas preview window it looks so good, not this blur thing, but in the render its all motion interlace thing.

And really much RED in the color. Im using hte vob direct in the program, i havent demuxed the mpeg file, i didnt belive that would make it a problem, but i might have to reedit everything now?

As you see in the screndump for the vob file its a PAL, not NTSC (http://www.digital-media.nu/videosettings/videoproperties.gif)
What I could do is render the project to AVI huffuff or how its spelled =P and then use an external codec and remove all interlacing, is that something you suggest?

[Amnon82]

Your encoded movie is OK. The original must be NTSC. Maybe you got an convert of the real source. Look.

For example. You have a movie DVD. Original it is produced in the USA. For example a trailer. Yes it is PAL, but interlanced, cos it was a NTSC source. If the realy reencode the movie it will be 25 full frames per second. If You have interlanced You got 50 half frames per second. On many motion it the film You can see the stripes I showed You in my screenshots. You can do two things.

First You can encode it like the source in interlanced (50 half frames per second) or You can encode it in progressiv (deinterlanced - 25 full frames per second) Normaly all PAL movies are encoded in this mode.

But for the producer it is simpler to do it the first way.
It's only the facts. Many ways leading to rome:D

Do the best what You think it is the best for the source. On my system it plays well what You've encoded. I only want to give You more information about the PAL and NTSC system.

I like progressive material more, cos it is clearer and sharper and easier to handle...

BTW: read this ... (http://www.doom9.org/ivtc-tut.htm)

That what You should read anyway:

FOR PAL AREA PEOPLE:

So far, most of what we have written is about NTSC rips. Now, when you have a PAL DVD, what do you do then?

On the positive side, you don't have to IVTC. You also have a larger picture to begin with (720x576), which means more information to begin with. Thus you should be able to make a better rip! On the negative side is unfortunately the fact that a lot of PAL DVDs are made from inferior sources, like NTSC DVDs.

You will, when dealing with PAL DVDs, get into three major cases, il buono, il brutto, il cattivo (TM Sergio Leone).


THE GOOD: PROGRESSIVE DVDs. These are usually shot on FILM and speeded up to 25fps or in some cases have an extra frame added every second to keep the length of the movie constant. It is also not unusual for PAL DVDs to have the fields shifted in this manner: 1t2b 2t3b 3t4b etc. Some DVDs switch between real progressive and field shifted progressive. If this happens twice every second then you have a DVD with a field added every 12 frames to keep the time constant. Switching can also occur if the DVD has been edited somewhere during the mastering process.

How do you see the differences between these cases? I’m afraid that the only thing that you can do is to closely examine the frames of the DVD. Usually you can very easily see if the major parts of the DVD are progressive, field shifted or rapidly switching. It can be much harder to spot a short sequence with the wrong field order, but if there are irregular switches then they will almost always appear at scene changes. Load the following script into VirtualDub and examine the frames closely:


LoadPlugin("mpeg2dec.dll")
#LoadPlugin("Decomb.dll") #Needed later for Telecide and Decimate
MpegSource("clip.d2v")

If the DVD looked interlaced already in DVD2AVI then you should create the .d2v file with Field Operation->Swap Field Order turned ON. If you find sequences where the field order switches then you must use Telecide(post=true) in your final script, but for further investigations please use post=false. Now, assuming that you have established that you have a progressive DVD, either by adding Telecide or by turning Swap Field Order ON/OFF, then we proceed to look for doubled frames. If they appear, they should only appear once every second, and in this case you must add Decimate(cycle=25) to your final script.


As a rule of thumb: The DVD’s that have only a few switches are very few and if you just remember to look at the final AVI before deleting the VOBs, you can almost always assume that if you look at a few different sequences in the DVD and they all show the same pattern (progressive, field shifted or switching twice per second) the whole DVD will adhere to that pattern. What did you say? It still doesn’t look good? Lots of horizontal lines all over the place? You have a truly interlaced DVD (Bad). Is there a lot of ghosting (Ugly)?


THE BAD: INTERLACED DVDs. As with NTSC interlace, the only thing to do is to run some form of de-interlacer, like FieldDeinterlace or GreedyHMA. These are quite common, as there is more stuff made for TV that is shot directly on video in Europe, even some quite high-class productions are shot directly on video and are therefore 50fps interlaced.


THE UGLY: DVDS CONVERTED FROM NTSC TO PAL. These are very common among cheap DVDs. Usually they are created by blending two nearby frames into one new, in a manner that removes 1 frame in 6 (30->25fps). These look really bad and they are a PITA to work with. My solution is usually to let Telecide(guide=2,post=true, blend=false) remain in the script. This will actually remove some of the worst ghosting. Then I add some form of SPATIAL smoothing. Temporal will only add to the ghosting and should be avoided at all costs with this kind of rip. If you think it looks too blurry, then try some sharpening, but be aware that this might enhance the edges of the ghost images, while at the same time remove the rest of the ghost, and you might not like the result.