De-interlacing question

Author: zombie84
Date: 3-Aug-2012, 10:22 PM

Author: zombie84
Time: 3-Aug-2012 10:22 PM
Post link

So, I'm about near the end of a Blade Runner edit and I do have a small problem.

I have an edit with mixed interlaced and progressive video. Problem is, the de-interlacer in the program I'm using (Womble) puts artifacts on and softens the image. Is there any way to apply a filter once I've exported the file so that only the interlaced shots are interlaced? In other words, if I "de-interlace" a mixed interlace/progressive video once it's exported will that screw anything up? For instance in VLC I can just turn on the de-interlace filter and the interlaced shots are de-interlaced nicely and the progressive shots look the same. Is there any way to do this to the actual video itself?

Author: satanika
Time: 4-Aug-2012 12:05 PM
Post link

Hmm, what framerate are you editing in, 29.97? And what are you outputting to, DVD?
29.97 footage interlaced and progressive hard telecined footage should go fine together in a dvd/vob I believe. 29.97 and soft telecined I'm not sure..?

The Monkey King - Uproar In heaven (1965) Restoration/Preservation Project

Nezha Conquers the Dragon King (1979) BBC 1.66:1 & Theatrical 2.35:1 preservations

Author: Moth3r
Time: 5-Aug-2012 6:08 PM
Post link

Without exact information it's difficult to offer advice.

It sounds like you are making a documentary-style edit that incorporates both 29.97 fps "shot for TV" interlaced and 24 fps "shot on film" progressive video.

If this is the case, and your final intended output format is indeed DVD-video, then the safest bet would be as satanika suggests to keep the interlaced material as-is, and hard telecine the progressive video (i.e. apply 3:2 pulldown to convert it to 29.97 fps and encode it as interlaced).

Of course the final quality is then down to how the deinterlacer in your playback chain deals with the mixed content. I imagine the telecined stuff won't look as good as the original progressive frames, but quality should still be acceptable.

Guidelines for post content and general behaviour: read announcement here

Max. allowable image sizes in signatures: reminder here

Author: guiser
Time: 5-Aug-2012 7:52 PM (Edited)
Post link

As a general question, wouldn't it be better to detelecine before doing the final encode?  That way the quality is a constant depending on how munch time you want to dedicate to processing the video before hand.
I know there are detelecine filters out there that produce amazing results if you take the time to tweak things, but they can be incredibly slow.  If you pay that cost up front so much the better for the end user, right?
PS- Sorry about the horrible formatting nonsense, there doesn't seem to be any way for me to get rid of it...