Creative Communities of the World Forums

The peer to peer support community for media production professionals.

Forums Apple Final Cut Pro Legacy Compressor speed and quality for deinterlacing

  • Compressor speed and quality for deinterlacing

  • Robert Withers

    October 14, 2013 at 3:33 pm

    I’m working with mini-DV NTSC footage from a tape, and using FCP 5.5. I sent a 2 minute test clip through Compressor 2 for deinterlacing. It did a good job, at highest quality, but took four hours for the 2 minute job.

    Would I get faster results with equal quality by saving this timeline as a standard self-contained Quicktime file and then deinterlacing on Compressor 4 on a faster machine?

    Thanks,
    Robert

    Robert Withers

    Independent/personal/avant-garde cinema, New York City

  • Rainer Wirth

    October 14, 2013 at 4:09 pm

    What sort of file do you want to get out of compressor?
    Is the material progressive?
    Why do you want deinterlace when you material is interlaced?

    cheers

    Rainer

    factstory
    Rainer Wirth
    phone_0049-177-2156086
    Mac pro 8core
    Adobe,FCP,Avid
    several raid systems

  • Robert Withers

    October 14, 2013 at 7:03 pm

    The material is not progressive, it’s interlaced 29.97 NTSC DV. I want the best quality file: resolution, color, etc.
    Why?
    I want it to look better. When I output from FCP through a miniDV camera to an HDTV monitor it looks jaggy and sawtoothed.
    When it’s cut, I want to import it into a Premiere HD project to combine with other HD material as one segment of a larger project.
    Then I want to be able to project it on a big screen in a theater and have it look as good as it can.
    Thanks,
    Robert

    Robert Withers

    Independent/personal/avant-garde cinema, New York City

  • Andrew Kimery

    October 14, 2013 at 9:45 pm

    A faster machine would surely help, but having the settings maxed out will always take a really long time.

  • Nick Meyers

    October 15, 2013 at 11:45 am

    personally i dont like compressor for this sort of this as you cant monitor what it is doing.

    for de-interlacing, i prefer Nattress Smart de-interlace, which i can do in FCP, then monitor the output.
    it is much faster than compressor, too.

    as you also need a rather large blow up, i think you should be asking about that as well.

    your best bet would be to capture to HD, sending your signal though a Teranex up-scaler.
    this may well be able to do the de-interlace as you go,
    but it might be best to upres to interlaced, then do your de-intelace later.
    ask around is the best advice i can give.

    nick

  • Robert Withers

    October 15, 2013 at 3:07 pm

    Thank you, Nick. I see that the Natress plug in will actually work with my retro FCP 5.5. That’s interesting. To use Teranex hardware I will need to check around my local post houses to see if any have deals I can afford, if any. Appreciate your thoughts. R.

    Robert Withers

    Independent/personal/avant-garde cinema, New York City

  • Robert Withers

    October 15, 2013 at 3:13 pm

    Here’s something I’m curious about. If I save the timeline as a self-continained Quicktime movie and move it to a faster computer can I get the same quality deinterlacing, upresing, etc. from that file as from trying to do those things within my retro FCP 5.5 software. Is anything lost by saving the QT file and working with it externally vs. working with plug-ins or “save as” functions within FCP. It’s getting harder to find software that will work with my retro FCP 5.5, and I can’t install it on newer, faster, computers.

    Robert Withers

    Independent/personal/avant-garde cinema, New York City

  • Robert Withers

    October 15, 2013 at 8:20 pm

    Yes, evidently not as good. But it’s in the can already. Thanks for your response, Dave LaRonde. Nevertheless my project is to deinterlace and upres, and am trying to determine the best flow. In your experience, does it matter if I perform these operations directly from my retro FCP 5.5 or can I save as QT movie and do this on a faster computer with different software?

    Robert Withers

    Independent/personal/avant-garde cinema, New York City

  • Nick Meyers

    October 15, 2013 at 10:48 pm

    exporting from FCP using “Same settings” or “item settings” will give you a simple transfer of data,
    no quality loss.

    if you have done a lot of colour correction on your DV footage in a DV timeline, then there is an argument that you have lost some quality already.
    but exporting it will be lossless from what you have at the moment,
    as would playing out to DV tape.

    you WILL lose your original Timecode & Reel #s

    if you are chasing quality, here is what i would recommend:
    whatever you do, don’t do your up-scale to HD in FCP.
    there are other tools for that.
    Hardware, such as the Teranex, as mentioned before.
    other brands of software: Resolve, which is free does a good upscale.
    Your adobe suite may do so as well, i don’t know.

    as for de-interlacing, as i’ve already said, i like to be able to see what i’m doing,
    and one reason for this is that the best result is NOT a one-setting solution.

    some shots: wides for instance, or shots with very little motion,
    can look better with a BLEND de-interlace, where you mix both fields and get better resolution.

    but most motion looks simply awful with blend, so you’d go with a single field.

    for a de-intelace job a did a while back (shot on HDV, destined for cinema screens)
    i exported one pass of the graded master with blend, one pass with single fields,
    then went through the film, deciding which was best on a case-by-case basis,
    for some shots i even did simple composites of both versions.

    but remember that de-interlacing, especially the non-blend variety, is throwing away resolution,
    so you should probably do that AFTER you up-scale.

    nick

  • Robert Withers

    October 18, 2013 at 2:07 am

    Thank you, Nick. I’m happy to know that exporting from FCP (“saving as a self-contained QT”?) is a basic data transfer without loss. It sounds like I can get the timeline out of my retro FCP and try a newer Compressor version on a faster machine. Or find something in Adobe to do this.
    I’ll also look into the options you suggest–the software, hardware, upscaling before de-interlacing, etc.
    Some of your tech knowledge is a bit over my head–I’m just learning about de-interlace options like blending. The process that gave good results in Compressor on my old machine involved settings like “motion compensation,” “adaptive details,” “resize” with “linear filter,” and a little “anti-alias” and “details” thrown in. I don’t know if it was blending or doing something else. But this was so slow it would take days of processing for the whole file and I already replaced the motherboard once on this macbook p.
    De-interlacing scene by scene is an interesting idea.
    Fortunately I don’t have to de-interlace the sound 🙂

    Robert Withers

    Independent/personal/avant-garde cinema, New York City

Viewing 1 - 10 of 10 posts

Log in to reply.

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy