Convert 29.97 Interlaced DV into 23.98 Progressive

[Steve Roberts]

If you don’t mind seeing the clips run more slowly, you can just re-interpret them as 23.976 frames per second. Same number of frames (images), they just play more slowly and match the frame rate of a 23.976 comp. Then you’d drag them into a 23.976 fps comp and render with no fields.

You might have to do them at 23.98, but try 23.976 and see if you get any weirdness back in the Avid.

If you actually want the clips to run at the original speed (e.g. a six-second action takes six seconds), you’d need to buy something like Twixtor to generate the in-between frames. That’s an AE plugin – you’d have to check the instructions to see how to do this kind of speed change.

[Straight A]

If you actually want the clips to run at the original speed (e.g. a six-second action takes six seconds), you’d need to buy something like Twixtor to generate the in-between frames. That’s an AE plugin – you’d have to check the instructions to see how to do this kind of speed change.

Timewarp which comes with AE7 Pro negates the need for Twixtor.

[Mylenium]

[Straight A] “Timewarp which comes with AE7 Pro negates the need for Twixtor.”

No, not really. Admittedly I never spent the money to get a full Twixtor (as I deal mainly with synthetic stuff, I can always just re-render), but there are noticeable differences in how Twixtor treats footage as opposed to Timewarp (aka Kronos light). In my opinion Twixtor treats extreme interpolations much better and the motion looks much smoother. Granted, this could be considered a moot point in most situations, nonetheless it does not make Twixtor entirely obsolete.

Mylenium

[Pour Myl

[Straight A]

In my opinion Twixtor treats extreme interpolations much better and the motion looks much smoother. Granted, this could be considered a moot point in most situations, nonetheless it does not make Twixtor entirely obsolete.

OH yes it does ! 😉

I have used both quite a bit and I find it hard see any difference at all, perhaps I have not pushed it to extreme situations (ie: large frame to frame differences) but for day-to-day slowing down and speeding up of footage Timewarp is as good as Twixtor.

My advice would be to see if Timewarp meets your needs before spending $329 (or $595 for the ‘pro’ version’) on Twixtor.

[Steve Roberts]

[Straight A] “My advice would be to see if Timewarp meets your needs before spending $329 (or $595 for the ‘pro’ version’) on Twixtor.”

Yeah, that would be a good idea. I’ve gotten spoiled on Twixtor, and haven’t used Timewarp yet. My bad. 🙂 But Twixtor may not be obsolete, depending on the footage … for me, it did a good job on a field of tall grass. Tough footage!

Time for a head-to-head, maybe …?

[Mylenium]

Well, like I said – I don’t have a full license of Twix, so my observations may indeed be biased or completely wrong. My tests were strictly based on some synthetic 3D rendered footage I had at hand mangled thru the demo, and it seemed to me that Twix does a finer job of smoothing out curved paths. I would be willing to admit that I may be seeing to much into it, though. Maybe some shootout comparison on different footage types would set the picture straight for me (and everyone else).

Mylenium

[Pour Myl

[Peter Litwinowicz]

Okay, I’m not going to get into the Twixtor is better than Pixel Motion/TimeWarp debate, because that’s up to you guys to decide for yourselves. What I can provide is some objective feature comparisons:

• Twixtor is often 2 or more times faster against both AE’s “pixel motion” and its Timewarp filter. Often Twixtor is even faster than 2x than the Timewarp plugin; it depends on the settings and whether or not you are adding motion blur upon speeding up a clip.
• Twixtor has a feature that allows you to not generate inbetweened frames on either side of a cut edit in your source clip (and, for dissolves,Twixtor has a way to turn off the motion estimation for just the transition based on where the transition is located in the source).
• Twixtor works in floating point. AE’s “pixel motion” works in floating point, but the Timewarp filter with changeable settings does not.
• Twixtor has the ability to remove motion blur upon slowing down footage. Timewarp will not remove motion blur; it only adds motion blur (a feature which Twixtor has as well).
• Twixtor does frame rate conversion very simply and is built in to the plugin. Pixel motion works as expected in this regard, but the Timewarp plugin assumes you will time-stretch the footage in a comp that’s the same frame rate as your source (as far as I’ve been able to figure out). I presume you can do the time-stretch math yourself… Precomping and retiming in the original source frame-rate and then put that into a comp with the required output frame-rate… a bit more work for the workflow.

Twixtor Pro also has many features to help you fix problems when they occur in the tracking. Most notably, when the tracking goes “bad”, Twixtor allows you to use AE’s splines (masks) and point positioners to show Twixtor Pro exactly where things are moving from frame to frame. There are no corresponding features in Timewarp or AE’s “pixel motion” setting. Twixtor Pro also allows you to specify up to 3 separation mattes in order to help the plugin track individual objects separately. Pixel Motion does not do this and the TimeWarp plugin only allows you to specify one foreground separation matte.

Just food for thought,
Pete Litwinowicz
https://www.revisionfx.com