Can this even be deinterlaced? How?

[absinthe]

Greetings all around.

I'm trying to clean up an AVI for encoding to MPG2, and the interlacing artifacts are pretty awful. I can usually just toss a TomsMoComp(1,5,1) or a FieldDeinterlace(blend=true) into my script and get pretty good results, but those, among other deinterlacing filters I've tried, don't seem to change this video at all.

The flick is a DVDrip, and the DVD itself is of a musical performance from 1982 which I feel sure was shot in Canada. From this information, might I assume that the original source was NTSC video, i.e. originally interlaced? If that is all true, is there anything that can be done about it?

edit: I failed to mention that the DVD from which I originally ripped this AVI is PAL (as is this AVI). I have always lived in the U.S., but the PAL DVD was all that was available at the time I bought it. If I am correct about the original video source being interlaced NTSC, what process might the video have gone through to be put on a PAL DVD, and how does this complicate things, if at all? The DVD is now very broken and, sadly, out of print. Ironically, an NTSC version was eventually released, but it's OOP too (unless I want to pay 50 bucks for it on eBay or Amazon Marketplace ... which I just might have to do :)). end edit

I'll be happy to post a video sample if requested. In the meantime, here's a quick pic. I was going to post little sample pics of what each of the filters I've tried has done, but truly none looks terribly different from another, so here's the original:

http://www.imageark.net/image.php?id=48185

Thanks,

-abs

[sh0dan]

Looks like the video was resized without being deinterlaced. That is a baaad thing. :scared:

[scharfis_brain]

please post a non-processed VOB-sample of that DVD, not an already ripped & encoded AVI.

sh0dan: maybe it is only (unnecessary) enlarged for showing the lacing better?

[SeeMoreDigital]

I love stuff like this... Yes, please post a sample!


Cheers

[absinthe]

Originally posted by sh0dan
Looks like the video was resized without being deinterlaced. That is a baaad thing. :scared:

I'm not sure whether or not you are referring to the size of the pic I posted, but if you are, it's only a crop I cut from a larger frame. :D

Here, I'll just post the whole original frame:

http://www.imageark.net/image.php?id=48236

There we go. :p

-abs

[scharfis_brain]

is this the image you want to deinterlace?
forget it!
it is not possible anymore. get the DVD and rerip the stuff in the correct way.

[absinthe]

Originally posted by scharfis_brain
please post a non-processed VOB-sample of that DVD, not an already ripped & encoded AVI.

sh0dan: maybe it is only (unnecessary) enlarged for showing the lacing better?

As above, the DVD was virtually destroyed. I've only kept it for the art work :D

But here's a 2.39 MB sample (http://home.carolina.rr.com/absharpe/piano_sample.avi) of the AVI, sans audio.

As I mentioned above, there is an NTSC version of this DVD that can be bought for the right price.

I think my question (in addition to how I can possibly fix this video) is on exactly what kind of process this video would have had to go through (assuming that it was indeed originally interlaced NTSC) to be put on a PAL DVD in the first place. These processes frankly confuse me.

-abs

[Mug Funky]

for PAL conversions, either the material arrives in PAL format already (with sped up audio), or it is either IVTC'd from an NTSC master (rare), or the master is run through an NTSC->PAL converter box.

these boxes bob the input (make a frame from each field), blend the frames together from 59.94fps to 50fps with a regular pattern, then they re-interlace the frames into PAL fields. for content that was shot on video, and is thus natively interlaced and not just telecined progressive frames, the converterbox is the only viable option. there are methods of motion-interpolation out there, but these are unstable, and the artefacts produced are usually far worse than what you get from blending.

what your video has gone through is a different process from all the above, and i sincerely hope you give the people who did it a nice, hard punch in the face for me. they've treated the material as progressive and simply resized it vertically. this only happens if somebody has used consumer software and not read anything about either interlacing or standards conversion. i bet the motion is jumpy as hell too.

if you can find it, get a copy of the NTSC version.

[SeeMoreDigital]

As scharfis_brain has already mentioned, doing what you want from such a source is impossible!

It does not help that your PAL AVI source contains only 512x408 pixels instead of 720x576... but all is not lost, when it comes to reducing some of the 'interlaced effect'.

Ideally what you need to try and do is 'double' the original quantity of vertical pixels and create a pseudo interlaced frame (in this case 720x816). Re-encode the pseudo interlaced frame but remove one of the fields (and hopefully some interlaced effect). Change the frame-rate and colour system. Encode back to XviD, but this time using an anamorphic 720x480 pixel frame.

I used to have access to equipment at work, where we could remove entire lines of video. Which is quite handy if the interlaced effect is occupying the same set of lines throughout the clip.

Okay, the procedure is not perfect, as removing entire lines of video could effectively half the resolution of the frame... but it's better than nothing....

Here's a very quickly compiled re-sample (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/seemoredigital/SMD_Piano_Sample_01.zip).


Cheers

[absinthe]

Thanks Mug Funky and SeeMoreDigital for the explanations.

I had tried using SeparateFields, but of course as you point out I lost half the resolution. But thanks for taking the trouble to produce a sample :)

No biggie, anyway. I had a feeling this wasn't going to work out since nothing was working. I really love this video, so I might have to break down and pay an outrageous price for a new copy. The thing is, I'm still trying to figure out for sure what the original source is.

I had thought that it was probably NTSC since the subject of the film is a Canadian pianist, and the filmmaker has a very French name. But on checking out the filmmaker at IMDB.com, it turns out he is very French (not Canadian), so maybe he brought his own equipment to the studio and the darn thing actually originated as PAL. :confused:

Anyway, I was just going to put the AVI I have on SVCD so I could watch it on my television again (PAL format would be fine for this purpose), so the 512 resolution would suffice. And truly, it doesn't look half-bad on TV at 480x480 as it is. I was just trying to "do it the right way."

I will eventually get my hands on a new copy of the DVD. Maybe then we can figure out whether it was originally PAL or NTSC. The only copy I can find available is at Amazon Marketplace and is advertised by the seller as a "region-code-free Asian release."

-abs

[absinthe]

Well, I finally did come across a review of the film stating that it was "clearly shot on NTSC video for early 80s television." I'm contacting the Amazon seller to see what format his DVD is in.

-abs

[absinthe]

Well, I'm back ... and now ($40 bucks later) I've got another copy of the original DVD!

As I mentioned above, I did find a review of this DVD (Glenn Gould Plays Bach: The Goldberg Variations) stating that it was clearly shot on NTSC video. The good news is, the DVD I now have is an Asian release and it's NTSC. This time I've made a proper backup (which I was able to do 1:1) in case anything should happen to it :D

So back to the matter of deinterlacing ... I've just read the excellent explanation of telecining here at Doom9. My understanding is that since this is an originally interlaced source (i.e. every frame is clearly interlaced), this video cannot be IVTC'd.

Lots of frames like this one (http://home.carolina.rr.com/absharpe/theycallmeinterlaced.JPG).

So I guess my question remains: if I want to save this to an XviD, what's the best treatment? I have already ripped the DVD and saved out a DVD2AVI project with no field operation performed (29.97).

Here's a 5 MB sample (http://home.carolina.rr.com/absharpe/GGclip.vob) VOB I VStripped out (video only).

So if I start with something like:

Mpeg2source("gould.d2v")
FieldDeinterlace(blend=true) ##being sure to deinterlace before resizing ... right?
LanczosResize(640,480)

. . . how might I improve upon that?

Thanks!

-abs

[SeeMoreDigital]

It's good that you've been able to confirm that the source was shot on NTSC video tape at 29.97fps.

At the end of the day much will depend on the type of playback equipment and screen you'll be using to your view your encodes. So all I can suggest is you generate interlaced and de-interlaced encode tests to see which you prefer.


Cheers

[trbarry]

If you have the NTSC version doesn't TomsMoComp(1,5,1) or TomsMoComp(0,5,1) now handle it okay?

- Tom

[absinthe]

Yes, I guess I will just have to try. It's a bummer that you have to go all the way through the process to really see what you're going to have, by which I mean that sometimes things appear different as a final product than they do as a preview in VirtualDub or whatever.

Just want to make sure that using whatever deinterlacer I choose to use before resizing is the correct thing to do. Also, I'm assuming it's okay to do it in the same script, just deinterlacing before I resize, as in my example.

I had been hoping to try my hand at manually deinterlacing with SeparateFields, SelectEvery, and Weave, but I guess those aren't called for here. On the other hand, I'm thinking of making AVI's from my Schoolhouse Rock DVD (I just love that stuff, man), so maybe the animation will present a challenge. I know it's interlaced NTSC.

Anyway, I'll give the script a shot on a short sample -- TomsMoComp, too -- and compare results.


Thanks,

-abs

[vhelp]

Hi,

FWIW.. I used virtualdub to deinterlace your .vob file.

At first, I thought it had something to do with some other strange
problem you were having w/ your source (per your earlier post) but
after D/L'ing and experimenting w/ deinterlacing techniques, I realized
then, that your source was Interlace. Oh well.

Anyways.., I resorted to U/L you a sample of a deinterlaced version
I worked on for you to compare with other methods posted.
I put boarders around it and deleted the first 12 frames since they were
"glitched" within your .vob file. You did say XviD or something. So,
anyways. You can Download (http://www.westnet.com/~vhelp/samples/090704.9000k.vob.zip) it for now, before I finally delete it in a
couple of days.

Cheers,
-vhelp

[Mug Funky]

i can't say for sure, but this may actually be blend-converted from PAL :O

it's hard to tell from the sample, but the motion-blurring seems non-uniform in places, and there's a slight hint of some blending going on.

this probably wont interfere with compression too much, but it's interesting to know - there may be a PAL version out there as well.

this doesn't surprise me - my copy of beethoven's 5th (von karajan, berlin, PAL land) (region 4) is actually in NTSC, and has a mixture of 3:2 telecine and field-blended PAL in it. it comes as no surprise as it's a Sony disc...

it seems the original concert was shot with 1 film camera and multiple video cameras, because all the bits with that old bugger Herbie are 3:2, and all the closeups of instruments are field-blended video. strange to see it converted to NTSC and released in PAL land. i'm probably the only person who bought it, to be honest.

[absinthe]

@vhelp:
Thanks for the treated sample. It looked very acceptable. I got a similar-looking result with "FieldDeinterlace." (I guess you can delete that file now; I don't guess anyone else will be wanting it :) ).

@Mug Funky:
There was also a PAL release of the DVD. I have much to learn regarding telecining, but I just don't see how something shot on NTSC video can be converted to PAL, at least not "neatly." As above, the filmmaker is French and lives in France ... so who knows maybe he shot it on SECAM :D

I also own a copy of the Beethoven's 5th DVD you mentioned, but I haven't examined it that closely. Of course mine's the NTSC version. Bought it the day it was released :)

-abs