-
Compressor: Why is there a Progressive setting if DVD is interlaced?
-
Ain’t that always the case? Go, do other stuff! Thank you.
But lastly… is space the only issue? I’ve got tons of space, it’s only a 29 minute film. I just want to be sure there is zero image quality hit. Whether viewed on a tv (presumably HDTV) or computer.
-
No significant quality hit – at 29 min. it’s nothing to worry about. I’d stick to the native frame rate and let the hardware do the appropriate decode.
Best,
Jeff G
Apple Master Trainer | Avid Cert. Instructor DS/MC | Adobe Cert. Instructor
————
You should follow me (filmgeek) on twitter. I promise to be nice.
New- my book (with Richard Harrington and Robbie Carman)- An Editor’s Guide to Adobe Premiere Pro
Compressor Essentials from Lynda.com
(older but still good) Marquee, Media Composer (3.5) and Basic/Advanced Color DVDs (1.0) from Vasst.com
Contact me through my Website -
Well, I learned one thing today: there is a quality hit going to 29.97i. They redid it at 24p and the ton of aliasing that had appeared in some animation diminished dramatically.
What’s weird, though, is that the image is washed out in their 24p version — too bright and desaturated compared to the original and to the 29.97i version they’d done. (The latter is also a bit too bright, but not as dramatically.)
Any idea why this would be?
-
You could have learned that by reading this thread, specifically above where I said:
[24p encoding] actually looks better since you can take the fixed amount of bits and spread them across fewer frames.
About your other comment regarding washed out video: whoever is encoding is clearly doing something wrong. What you put in should come out looking relatively the same, video levels wise. People think they’re doing you a favor by adding filters in encoding – they’re not. If you’re paying for this, keep having them do it over and over until they get it right. There’s no reason it should look washed out.
-
Somehow missed that sentence.
The the specific issue of the aliasing in animation is what stood out most.
Yep, paying for it, it’s odd. Especially odd since when they did it interlaced at the other frame rate, it wasn’t like this. We’ll see what they do overnight.
-
No luck so far. They’re using Digital Rapids for the encoding because they said their Sonic hardware can’t do 23.976.
They tried chroma settings at “default” and “unspecified,” but the mpeg is identical, too bright and a bit washed out.
Now they’re going to try lowering the brightness themselves a bit. I don’t know if that will degrade the image at all, and it sounds a bit like taking a shot in the dark, trying to get it right that way, but they’re trying.
The DIT who owns the ARRI Alexa we shot on said it sounds like an issue with gamma. He wonders if they have any ability to choose gamma correction for the ProRes 4444 files they’re using to make the DVDs, since some applications have a hard time with generating proper ProRes gamma.
Is there a better encoder? Clipster? It’s a big L.A. post house, seems strange.
-
[Glenn Camhi] “it sounds a bit like taking a shot in the dark”
Yeah the whole thing does.
I can’t understand how this can get screwed up. DVD encoding has been around and perfected over the last, I don’t know, two decades? It’s not like this is uncharted territory.
Point one: if you have DVD encoding equipment that can’t handle 23.976 fps, you have very outdated and poor encoding equipment. It might be awesome at what it does, but 23.976 is the norm for every major feature release on DVD. And that was established a long time ago.
The simple fact that you can do professional 23.976 encoding and simple authoring yourself with a $50 piece of software (Compressor) should be enough to elicit the proper amount of derision toward this company who’s handling your encoding. There’d have to be a pretty amazing reason why it doesn’t look right. And them thinking that another pre-encode process (they’re going to try lowering the brightness themselves a bit) will solve it is just a joke.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up