Appropriate Field Order for Progressive videos in interlaced projects ?

[Peter Groom]

Interesteing question , and Id hope someone with more specialized knowlege than me might contribute, but Id think that the progressive footage will just go into your interlaced project without issue, as I understand progressive has both fields the same in any case.
Peter

Post Production Dubbing Mixer

[Scott Cole]

On the import menu is “Field” Correct for current project. I’d go with that. That being said, it is my understanding that for 1080i HD, upper field is first.

As an aside to this topic. One set of keys everyone onlining an interlaced project should have somewhere on their keyboard is “Step forward one field” and Step Backward one field.” I may have exact wording wrong, but you get the jist. As you use these keys, you will see a small “2” become visible on alternate fields in either your source or record monitor, upper right hand corner. It’s the easy only way of seeing field 2 while still. If you step through your video, and it seems to be jumping backwards every other field, that’s a good indication of wrong field order imports.

M. Scott Cole
Senior Post Production Editor
60 MINUTES
CBS News, NYC
sc6@cbsnews.com
mscottc@comcast.net

[Peter Groom]

Hi Scott
That sounds well worth huntin g for.
which menu is that available in.?
Peter

Post Production Dubbing Mixer

[Stacy Lincoln]

I often see I have interlacing problems in editing with different HD footage. One GREAT way to get rid of it is to apply the Timewarp filter in AVID FX. After applying and opening the Effects Pallette, choose Interpolated Blended from the drop down menu. Then, choose Interlaced in…but Progressive Out. All interlacing issues are gone.

[Rosie Walunas]

This happens often with broadcast destined projects that incorporate progressive footage? Still a proper field order should be chosen upon import – if it’s not ordered for current, which doesn’t seem like the initial correct choice.

[Neil Patience]

With the exception of HDV (or DV) footage which is lower field first, just about every other format is upper field first.
As Peter says your progressive footage has identical fields which have no temporal difference between them so each field is identical and this will slot in just fine.

best wishes
Neil
http://www.patience.tv

8 Core MacPro, Kona 3, Tangent Wave, Mackie Universal
i7 2.7 Gig MBP (non retina) 16Gigs Ram Blackmagic Monitor Mini

[Rosie Walunas]

Really? I mean that makes sense.

But I’ve read progressive footage in interlaced programs can have a shivering look to it.

What does this tutorial exactly apply to then:
https://magazine.creativecow.net/article/interlacing-progressive-footage

Thanks for everyone’s responses.

[Neil Patience]

[Rosie Walunas] “But I’ve read progressive footage in interlaced programs can have a shivering look to it.”

I guess it depends what you mean by “shivering”. Progressive footage has a “filmic” look and in an interlaced timeline will retain that look in that because each field is identical the motion is every 25th of a second and not every 50th as in the case of interlaced. – I am in PAL land so I think in 25s and 50s but same difference.
So it may appear less “smooth” because it imitates the look of film (which most people find very pleasing)

There is no issue with doing this, think of every single movie shot on film you have seen on TV. You are not aware of shivering in that case.

I think it depends also on how you monitor it. You really need an external video monitor and not just a computer screen to make a proper judgement.
Computers mangle interlaced which is why when shooting for the web progressive is the way to go and people always say interlaced looks bad on their computers.

For broadcast however they usually require, in my case a 50i master (or 25psf) But you can still shoot progressive 25P and put it into the 50i sequence without issue.

I sort of missed the fact that you are perhaps trying to get the interlaced and progressive footage to look as identical as possible as I was concentrating more on the field order.

So the tutorial is suggesting a workflow to make the progressive footage look properly interlaced, which as you can see is quite a business as trying to get a temporal difference between frames where there is none is not that easy.

best wishes
Neil
http://www.patience.tv

8 Core MacPro, Kona 3, Tangent Wave, Mackie Universal
i7 2.7 Gig MBP (non retina) 16Gigs Ram Blackmagic Monitor Mini

[Rosie Walunas]

Ok, thanks for your response. I’ve been under the impression that if the field order upon import was entered incorrectly things would look horrid on any of the outputs where the progressive footage appears.

And for films on TV I assumed they were undergoing some heavy duty conversions formatted for broadcast.

Thanks.

[Neil Patience]

You are correct in that if the field order for upper field footage was reversed to lower (or the other way round) then things would look horrid, motion would become very jerky. You used to see this in FCP quite a bit where people mixed DV footage with say Digibeta footage and while FCP would try to add the shift field filter in the right places it would sometimes get things muddled.
This was not always apparent until viewed on a proper monitor when it was often too late!.

Films may have gone trough a frame rate conversion but the actual progressive v interlaced was fine.

Back before video cameras could shoot progressive I used to cut a lot of music videos and anything with a decent budget was usually shot on film precisely for the filmic look and transferred to tape (Telecine) to edit. They would usually shoot the film at 25 so it was a frame for frame match with video. Which in those days was 1″ or Digibeta, both interlaced and no heavy duty conversion needed.
Of course there was no mixing of any interlaced footage generally so the need to make them match was not there.

best wishes
Neil
http://www.patience.tv

8 Core MacPro, Kona 3, Tangent Wave, Mackie Universal
i7 2.7 Gig MBP (non retina) 16Gigs Ram Blackmagic Monitor Mini