Altering Interlaced Content

[EpheMeroN]

I recently captured a live sporting event and there was a brief mishap from the crowd that I wanted to see a lot clearer.

I have a 29.970fps pure interlaced video @ 540x420. Is there a way to say double the framerate and make this a 60 frame progressive video? I just want to make the video as clean and clear as I possibly can.

That way I could edit it within Vegas Video and slow it down to where the few seconds would be much more visible.

[Guest]

Originally posted by EpheMeroN
I have a 29.970fps pure interlaced video @ 540x420. Is there a way to say double the framerate and make this a 60 frame progressive video?Bob()
KernelBob()
DGBob()
SmoothDeinterlace()
(etc.)

Take your pick.

[rfmmars]

separatafileds
doubleweave

add deinterlace after that.

richard
www.photorecall.net

[EpheMeroN]

Originally posted by neuron2
Bob()
KernelBob()
DGBob()
SmoothDeinterlace()
(etc.)

Take your pick.
What are the main differences between the 3 different bob methods?
Or are they fairly similar?

As for deinterlacing.. I don't want to deinterlace my content, as in my eyes, that reduces quality. I just want to make this clip I have the most visible and clear as I can as I edit it within Vegas Video.

[Guest]

If your clip is not visible, we can't help with that. If it is not clear, maybe you could try blind deconvolution. :)

You're being very cryptic here. Try posting a frame grab and circle the area of interest. Then we can tell what if anything can be done to help you.

[EpheMeroN]

Originally posted by neuron2
If your clip is not visible, we can't help with that. If it is not clear, maybe you could try blind deconvolution. :)
I'm looking for free webspace as I type this :)

[EpheMeroN]

Okay here's an example of what I'm talking about:

http://www.2and2.net/Uploads/Movies/example.avi

This was taken from a live event on television. No deinterlacing technique can clean this up properly due to such fast motion.

I want to make out who it is that fell off to the right of the camera. It's very hard to though as it is right now.

That's why I was thinking of possibly doubling the framerate.

[Guest]

avisource("example.avi")
assumetff().Bob()

and then single step in VirtualDub.

[EpheMeroN]

Thanks a bunch. It worked like a charm. Two quick questions though...

How come at random when stepping forward it goes back one to two frames and then proceeds forward again? It occurs every 20-30 frames.

Finally, my video is Top Field First? I've been using AviSynth's Info() command to see what field order my video has been. Each time it "Parity: Assuming Bottom Field First".

Although I did always think analog captures were Top Field First.

[Guest]

Originally posted by EpheMeroN
How come at random when stepping forward it goes back one to two frames and then proceeds forward again? It occurs every 20-30 frames. The clip you provided had 3 frames, so I'm unable to address this question.

Finally, my video is Top Field First? I've been using AviSynth's Info() command to see what field order my video has been. Each time it "Parity: Assuming Bottom Field First". Avisynth does not determine the field order. It is just telling you what it is using. Your 3-frame clip was TFF. You set the field order for Avisynth using AssumeTFF() or AssumeBFF().

[rfmmars]

@neuron2

How come at random when stepping forward it goes back one to two frames and then proceeds forward again? It occurs every 20-30 frames.

I see this also at times only at the begining of a clip, so to get around it, I just have two or three seconds of video leader attached.

It happens when the script calls

separateFields
doubleweave

richard

[scharfis_brain]

hey, richard!

you're always posting doubleweave().separatefields()

can you explain, why this?

to me, it is a little bit confusing, showing every field twice.

doubleweave().separatefields()

is the same like:

separatefields().selectevery(1,0,0)

or

separatefields()
changefps(framerate(last)*2)

[rfmmars]

Hi there This was used as you can see to double the number frames that I needed to solve the studder problem. I will try what you posted too.

The thing is when the problem is solved, you don't look for another solution.

This last post was for neuron2 just letting him know that I have seen this one step forward two steps back too.

richard