Encoding for LCD display

[Eric Pautsch]

Not really any tricks but experience, good source material and good encoders.

[Michael Sacci]

Totally wrong, the question is how is your footage shoot, LCDs still display interlaced footage. HDTV uses interlace, HD cameras still shoot interlaced. HD is not a progressive format.

So if you shoot interlace, you edit interlaced and you author interlaced. If you want the progressive look you shoot progressive.

[Noah Kadner]

Not a lot of leeway in the DVD spec. Worst is 60i 4:3 720×480 NTSC. Best is 24p 16:9 720×480. Still very low resolution. Well shot/encoded will look decent on an HD display with good upconverter and a progressive DVD player. But nothing like a nice native Blu-ray at 1080p.

Noah

Check out my book: RED: The Ultimate Guide to Using the Revolutionary Camera!
Unlock the secrets of 24p, HD and Final Cut Studio with Call Box Training. Featuring the Sony EX1 Guidebook, Panasonic HVX200, Canon EOS 5D Mark II and Canon 7D.
Visit my Editors Blog– Tips and Gear for Editors.

[Stephen De vere]

Thanks for replies. Maybe I am asking the wrong question.

Really I am trying to understand why interlaced SD shot footage looks blocky in places on a 720 LCD but lovely on a Grade 1 CRT, using the same DVD player and connection type, whereas HD progressive (Varicam) originated stuff is good on both.

I just don’t know if paying a lot of money for the encoding of my interlaced SD shot footage is worth it. How do I know if the artefacts I see in the encodes I have had done by a pro are caused by the source or by the encoding method/settings ?

The source looks so much better when I grade it and monitor it on my 21″ Grade 1 CRT via SDI from the FCP timeline. (DVCPro50 shot, 10 bit U/compressed rendering). Just seems so disappointing after so many year’s work that it is such a difficult transfer to make. I even begin to feel it was waste of extra expense to shoot the film DV50 instead of DV25.

I have serious doubts about the competence of the post house that did the encodes so perhaps I just have to try another.

[Stephen De vere]

There is quite challenging footage in the film – like small furry things running around in big wides and in big close-ups. I think it may need some special attention in places – things that just the high bit rate (8Mbs CBR) can’t help with entirely.

[Michael Sacci]

Exactly, the difference is not the encoding, it is the source video, one was shot on progressive, high end HD camera vs SD interlace.

But to deinterlace SD footage you are throwing away info. Once again 2 interlaced fields is not a progressive frame, So depending on how well the software deinterlaces your footage is always in question. There are plugins that do a great job but this will never look as good as if the footage was shot as progressive. The opposite is that progressive interlaces very easily but simply splitting the frame into fields, no quality lose and it keeps the progressive feel.

[Stephen de Vere] “film DV50 instead of DV25. “
Well I can tell you, you would be a lot more disappointed if you did. DV25 cannot be CC as well as DV50 and it really suffers when going to m2v.

[Stephen de Vere] “I have serious doubts about the competence of the post house that did the encodes so perhaps I just have to try another.”
That is a totally different thing.

[Stephen De vere]

Michael,

The other thing that troubles me about the result I am getting with the mpeg2 encode is that footage shot DV25 (DSR450s at best) for news and other low budget programming looks better on the same 40″ LCD set coming over BBC Freeview SD channel than my DV50 footage coming off a DVD.

Isn’t the data rate for the Freeview channels even lower than the DVD spec ? The transmission encoders have had an awful lot of R&D spent on them, I believe, but it is annoying to see a better picture than I can get with a DVD.

[Stephen De vere]

Micahel,

Not quite sure if you are suggesting trying de-interlacing before encoding ? I know that is important step when scaling down eg. for web encodes but I was assuming no advantage otherwise for full DI DVD. Or is this wrong ?

[Michael Sacci]

No I’m not suggesting it.

[Noah Kadner]

Yeah I don’t get why some people assume deinterlacing i.e. throwing away half your picture will somehow create a better image. Nope…

Noah

Check out my book: RED: The Ultimate Guide to Using the Revolutionary Camera!
Unlock the secrets of 24p, HD and Final Cut Studio with Call Box Training. Featuring the Sony EX1 Guidebook, Panasonic HVX200, Canon EOS 5D Mark II and Canon 7D.
Visit my Editors Blog– Tips and Gear for Editors.