Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Capturing and Editing Video > Avisynth Usage

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 4th November 2008, 21:49   #21  |  Link
mikeytown2
Resize Abuser
 
mikeytown2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 623
@KR
Deinterlacing , for viewing on a PC is fine, most people will encourage that... deinterlacing before burning to a DVD: "The result is an abomination" - 2Bdecided, which you agree with . TV's work best when fed interlaced video. PC's work best when given deinterlaced video. U want Interlaced video on a DVD if the original footage was interlaced. I'm just driving this point home and locking the door.

As for your results, my guess is VDubMod is detecting the interlaced material, bobing before it resizes and blending the fields. Use DGMPGDec to load the m2v files directly into AviSynth, no frame serving, no color conversions, no 60GB file; overall a better way of doing things then what you suggested.
mikeytown2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th November 2008, 02:53   #22  |  Link
KR
Tester
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 39
lol thanks mikeytown2 I wasn't aware of DGMPGDec...
I had found a way to not lose quality but it sure was tedious in file manipulation and resulted in approx 100GB per hour of video.

Thanks again
__________________
May your future be filled with happiness.
KR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th November 2008, 04:59   #23  |  Link
Sagekilla
x264aholic
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 1,752
@mikeytown2: That depends on the display and it's hardware. If you're using a CRT based TV, which inherently works well with interlacing, then I'd say yes. Otherwise, if it's a standard TV I'd say be wary because some have some really poor deinterlacers so the quality might not be so great.
__________________
You can't call your encoding speed slow until you start measuring in seconds per frame.
Sagekilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th November 2008, 08:13   #24  |  Link
vampiredom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 233
@sagekilla: I totally agree. I have come to realize the fact that progressive footage looks better on interlaced displays than interlaced footage on progressive screens -- especially at SD resolution on HD sets. I say 24p, 25p, 30p and the ways to go for most DVD projects these days. It's a shame, but it's simply a reality that most 720p or 1080p displays don't play nicely with true interlaced NTSC or PAL.

That said, a good deinterlacer is key. With all respect to their author(s), I believe that tools such as TempGaussMC, MCBob, MVBob, et al. are probably impractical (and often overkill) for processing large amounts of HD footage. Try Yadifmod + TomsMoComp (very fast) or EEDI2 (not so fast). Good quality at reasonable speeds.

DGMpgDec/DGIndex is great for this process. I just finished batching 200 or so source clips friom HDV60i->DV 30p. However, in support of frameserving via DebugMode: I use DMFS in Premiere Pro CS3 all the time. It works fabulously. It lets the editing program help you edit efficiently, while letting AviSynth, VirtualDub, and HCEnc handle post-processing, conversion etc. This allows you to ge the best of both worlds, so to speak.

A lot can also be said for the ability to color correct clips in a nice graphical environment. Then, when you output HD (in YUY2 or RGB) via DebugMode and scale it to SD, it will "smooth" some of the gradients, etc. that were perturbed by the limits tweaking an of an 8-bit source. In other words, it's benficial to do CC on the HD source, rather than the SD output. DebugMode facilitates the process nicely. Now you can let AviSynth excel with its excellent deinterlacing and scaling abilities (way better than Premiere).

And for any other Premiere Pro users, you can actually use DGIndex as a sort of replacement for DebugMode. Using Adobe Media Encoder you can export 4:2:2 MPEG2 I-frame (150Mpbs or so) and then index that with DGIndex. Actually, FFMpegSource seems to work well on I-frame-only .m2v elementary streams also, from what I've seen.
vampiredom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th November 2008, 11:33   #25  |  Link
2Bdecided
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by vampiredom View Post
@sagekilla: I totally agree. I have come to realize the fact that progressive footage looks better on interlaced displays than interlaced footage on progressive screens -- especially at SD resolution on HD sets. I say 24p, 25p, 30p and the ways to go for most DVD projects these days. It's a shame, but it's simply a reality that most 720p or 1080p displays don't play nicely with true interlaced NTSC or PAL.
While this is undoubtedly true*, the 25 images per second of 25p look dramatically different from the 50 images per second of 50i (on any TV!). 25p stutters. 50i gives realistic fluid motion.

(The same goes for 30p vs 60i, and the difference between 24p and 60i is even greater.)

If you want the look of 25p, fine. However, if what you wanted (and therefore what you started with) was 50i, then dropping it to 25p is a far bigger change to the image than any amount of artefacts arising from interlaced MPEG-2 encoding and subsequent poor deinterlacing of 50i.


25p vs 50i/50p isn't such a dramatic difference on most PCs, because few PCs display 50p properly anyway - 50p still stutters on a PC - just less than 25p. However, on a real TV, 50i is butter smooth, while 25p is stutter stutter stutter.

(To get 50i/50p to look equally smooth on a PC requires specific hardware and drivers, and a lot of hard work.)

Cheers,
David.

P.S. * - decent TVs play everything properly - even SD interlaced content. It's at the "cheaper" end of the market where you find panels which make HD look rather good, and interlaced SD look even worse than it should. Using a good upscaling DVD player can help such a TV realise the best from SD DVDs.
2Bdecided is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th November 2008, 18:17   #26  |  Link
vampiredom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 233
Quote:
Using a good upscaling DVD player can help such a TV realise the best from SD DVDs
Yes, but most film DVDs progressive anyway. Nearly all film titles that I've seen are either NTSC 23.976 fps (on which the DVD player adds pulldown for interlaced displays, or plays progressively on progressive scan setups) or PAL 25p (often sampled as interlaced, but progressive nonetheless).

Like most things, this is totally subjective -- and the results will vary depending on the type of content. I believe the reason why film titles look OK on DVD is because they were shot with 1/48 shutter speed. Film was designed to be shot and viewed at (or around) 24p, so filmmakers mind these limitations as they shoot and edit.

I am not judging my opinion based exclusively on cheap HDTV -- I've seen some really nice ones that do horrible things to interlaced SD content, such as broadcast TV.
vampiredom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th November 2008, 10:56   #27  |  Link
Comatose
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 639
Well, many times broadcast TV is a disaster, so don't blame it on the TV right away.
You can only really blame the TV if you have the source to analyze later.
Comatose is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
avisynth, deinterlace, dvd, frameserver, hdv

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:02.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions Inc.