-
Are all de-interlacers the same, or do they each do it differently?
Currently editing some mini-DV footage on the computer and it seems that it’s interlaced when I export it. Do all mini-DV camcorders have their captures interlaced?
Anyhow, are all de-interlacing plugins the same, or do they each do it differently?
PS > I’m using PAL, as opposed to NTSC.
Many thanks,
Timo
-
9 Replies
-
[Timo-UK] “it seems that it’s interlaced when I export it.”
What format are you exporting to? if back to tape it will be interlaced.
-
The interlacing was there after capturing the video via firewire into Premiere Pro from my mini-DV camcorder. I didn’t realise it was there until I exported it to AVI, due to the preview window in Premiere being much smaller than full size.
It means I have to go back into Premiere Pro and process all the captures with a de-interlacer plugin.
-
Timo,
Why do you want it deinterlaced? What are you exporting to?
Dave
-
Thanks for the reply. I will eventually be exporting it to DVD.
This is what I’m finding when exporting it to AVI format:-
https://www.gobo.dsl.pipex.com/images/LacingPic.jpg
The one on the left is a screengrab of an exported AVI (played via Windows Media Player Classic) without processing. The pic on the right was de-interlaced using a plugin in PremierePro before being exported to AVI.
The original camcorder captures within PremierePro are interlaced. I can only think I recorded/imported them into Premiere Pro incorrectly? Or is all camcorder footage interlaced? So that you normally have to de-interlace them once captured in a program like PremPro?
Is it better to de-interlace all the captures before adding any effects? (I’m guessing so).
And, are all de-interlacers the same, or do they each do the job differently (with varying results)?
Thank you!
-
[Timo-UK] “The original camcorder captures within PremierePro are interlaced. I can only think I recorded/imported them into Premiere Pro incorrectly? Or is all camcorder footage interlaced?”
Yes, unless the cam has custom settings it will be interlaced.
If you are exporting to DVD why deinterlace? you would be limiting the DVD to playing on progressive scan DVD players, if you have a interlaced DVD it will playback on different players and Screens
-
>> “If you are exporting to DVD why deinterlace? you would be limiting the DVD to playing on progressive scan DVD players, if you have a interlaced DVD it will playback on different players and Screens”
Must admit I’m very new to all this. This is my first project and it’s been a very steep learning curve.
So DVDs are interlaced, too?
How does a DVD player know if the video material on the DVD is interlaced or not? For example, if you burnt a non-interlaced AVI file onto a DVD? I’m not sure that any of the AVIs I’ve ever seen have been interlaced? Or is interlacing added to AVIs just before burning to DVD?
Another reason I thought it was best to de-interlace, is when I’m using plugins such as Twixtor (motion speed remapping). – I imagined Twixtor would work a whole lot better on a clean de-interlaced image in Premiere Pro as opposed to a fuzzy interlaced one?
I just don’t want the fuzzy, ghostly, echoey double-image interlaced trails that are shown in Premiere Pro to be shown on the final DVD output (ie. when it appears on the television.). De-interlacing the captures gives a clearer image to work with in Premiere Pro. I assumed this is what is carried forward? WYSIWYG and all that?
My brain’s interlaced, in trying to understand it all! 😀
Help much appreciated. 🙂
-
Hi Timo
gonna be tough to put you up to speed in just one post…
Anyway:
– PAL is interlaced by design (as is NTSC). Therefore all DV cameras record interlaced.
HD has several formats, some of them non-interlaced (progressive), marked by the p
after the ID (which actually is the vertical resolution), eg 720p. There are some
cams that apparently can do sort of progressive on DV, but I do not know details.
– As our TVs still are normal PAL/NTSC for most, DVDs are primarily interlaced as well.
There are now progressive capable players now that projectors and LCD/Plasma TVs
start getting more common. As they are inherently progressive, progressive signals
work better on them.
– If you target ‘normal’ DVD players you do not just burn AVIs to DVD. You have to
“author” a DVD, and the most important part of this is converting you footage to
MPEG2 format (which can be interlaced or progressive, interlaced being (way) more
common). It seems there are a few players out there that can handle files but mostly
DivX if I got that correctly. Everything I do is interlaced DV/DVD in PAL.
– In Premiere (and media player), you get these “comb” artifacts because they show the
still as the combination of 2 interlaced fields. On a TV, they would be 1/50th second
apart & therefore make motion smoother. Displayed together, they obviously look weird.
But it’s usually better that only having a single field (every other line only). If
you hook up a D/A converter to your firewire and attach a regular TV, you will see that
(only in regular playback) the artifacts are not visible on the TV.
– Progressive would be very convenient for essentially everything with effects at least.
But as PAL ist interlaced, you’ll first have to deinterlace, which normally is quite a
lossy process. (potential) Drawback of progressive (at least at PAL’s standard ‘frame’
rate of 1/25th second) is that motion looks more ‘jumpy’ (less smooth) than interlaced
because the eye percieves the 50 fields (every other line) per second virtually like
50 frames (full pictures) per second which is smoother. But it’s closer to “real” film
and therefore preferred by many (“film look” vs the smoother “video look”).Hope I got everything correct & that I was of some help…
— Kyle
-
Many thanks for that Kyle! Very helpful stuff there. Everything makes sense now, the way you say that the television “scans” and projects only half the lines at a time (ie. even or odd).
Glad you mentioned that de-interlacing was a lossy procedure – I was originally thinking that I could de-interlace captures to process them with effects and then re-interlace the final product for authoring to DVD.
I didn’t realise de-interlacing just threw away data (about half of it, I guess now), but I thought it just skewed it so that the previous and present frames were merged to form a full progressive image. Ie. merging the odd lines of the previous frame with the even lines of the present frame to restructive a non combed image, so you could process it properly with effects and then re-interlaced for burning.
One last thing, how do I know if the camcorder and/or DV capture is upper-field or lower-field interlaced?
Thanks ever so much. Have a good weekend. 🙂
Timo
-
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up