Creative Communities of the World Forums

The peer to peer support community for media production professionals.

Activity Forums Apple Final Cut Pro Legacy FCP reporting Interlaced on Deinterlaced material in 1080

  • FCP reporting Interlaced on Deinterlaced material in 1080

    Posted by Craig Seeman on August 1, 2008 at 1:56 pm

    There’s apparently on odd bug in FCP 6.0.4.

    I imported WMV HD 1080p material (using Flip4Mac) in FCP and it reports the video as interlaced upper field. I thought maybe it was a Flip4Mac issue but I tested with H264 MOV that was 1080p and FCP reported that as interlaced upper field too.

    The same two files show as progressive when imported into Compressor 3.0.3.

    So far it ONLY happens if the frame size is 1920×1080. The same source video converted to smaller frame sizes show correctly as progressive in FCP.

    I’m not yet sure if it’s simply a “reporting” issue or it actually impacts how FCP handles the video.

    I know not many people import WMV HD or H264 since they’re not “native” timeline codecs so maybe others haven’t noticed.

    Again it only seems to happen with 1080 video and non “native” codecs . . . so far.

    Craig Seeman replied 17 years, 9 months ago 4 Members · 13 Replies
  • 13 Replies
  • Rainer Wirth

    August 1, 2008 at 2:10 pm

    The WMV stuff including Flip4mac sometimes reacts strange with 6.0.4 and Leopard. I still use it with 4.9 in Tiger and FCP5.

    Rainer

  • Craig Seeman

    August 1, 2008 at 2:27 pm

    The point is, it’s NOT specific to WMV. H264 MOV and FCP shows the exact same issue. The fact that it’s FCP and not Compressor seems to point to an FCP bug. It’s easy for me to reproduce. It happens with every 1080 H264 clip I’ve imported so far (as well as WMV).

  • Gary Adcock

    August 1, 2008 at 2:30 pm

    [Craig Seeman] “HD 1080p material (using Flip4Mac) in FCP and it reports the video as interlaced upper field.”

    since it is a progressive segmented frame (in effect – interlace with the same field for upper and lower)
    why would this be Odd.

    the only cameras that most people see on this list that shoot TRUE progressive at 1080 is RED or Phantom. Every other one shoots PsF in 1080.

    gary adcock
    Studio37
    HD & Film Consultation
    Post and Production Workflows
    Inside look at the IoHD

  • Craig Seeman

    August 1, 2008 at 2:39 pm

    [gary adcock] “since it is a progressive segmented frame (in effect – interlace with the same field for upper and lower)
    why would this be Odd. “

    Why would Compressor report it differently though?

    Don’t forget the clips I’m referring to are WMV HD and H264 MOV. They’re not from the camera at that point. I’d think those compressed clips are genuine progressive frames at that point unless you’re saying various compression apps actually make PSF frames. BTW if I input the camera originals they show up as either 1080p or 1080i as recorded (at least from the XDCAM EX and P2 sources I’ve used).

  • Rafael Amador

    August 1, 2008 at 3:23 pm

    Hi Craig,
    FC can’t know the field order of any movie you import.
    Not even in stuff made in FC.
    FC expect certain field order in some kind of movies.
    A DV clip will be always checked as Lower first even if, for any reason you have de-interlaced or shift the fields.
    Make a simple test:
    Take any NTSC clip (Lower first) to FC and export as NONE.
    Re-import to FC. Will shows up as Lower in the Browser.
    FC can’t recognize the field order of the very FC files.
    In FC the “Interpret footage” is as necessary as in AE.
    rafael

    http://www.nagavideo.com

  • Rafael Amador

    August 1, 2008 at 3:48 pm

    [gary adcock] “the only cameras that most people see on this list that shoot TRUE progressive at 1080 is RED or Phantom. Every other one shoots PsF in 1080.”
    Hi Gary,
    Recording with two video heads on tape, I understand the reason for PsF, but I don’t understand why to use it when recording on a solid state memory.
    Rafael

    http://www.nagavideo.com

  • Gary Adcock

    August 1, 2008 at 4:23 pm

    [Rafael Amador] ” I understand the reason for PsF, but I don’t understand why to use it when recording on a solid state memory. “

    Absolutely Nothing!!! (really)

    PsF has to do with Playback compatibility not the recording-

    PsF files are treated in most NLEs (except FCP) as progressive – then the playback is segmented into 48i to ease the 24 frame “motion judder” – THIS IS IDENTICAL to Theatrical projection were the shutter opens and closes twice per frame to ease the frame motion- appearing to the eye as playback at 48fps.

    One other reason was early CRT’s (most actually) could not play back progressive content correctly- do mainly to the phosphors design and decay rates needed when playing back SD on the same screens.

    gary adcock
    Studio37
    HD & Film Consultation
    Post and Production Workflows
    Inside look at the IoHD

  • Rafael Amador

    August 1, 2008 at 4:25 pm

    Thanks Gary. That makes sense.
    rafael

    http://www.nagavideo.com

  • Gary Adcock

    August 1, 2008 at 5:20 pm

    [Rafael Amador] “Thanks Gary. That makes sense. “

    your welcome

    it is harder now that red is output signal can be true P

    it will confuse everyone.

    The explanation is part of Walter’s FAQ

    gary adcock
    Studio37
    HD & Film Consultation
    Post and Production Workflows
    Inside look at the IoHD

  • Craig Seeman

    August 1, 2008 at 8:35 pm

    I’ve imported 1080p and 1080i from XDCAM EX HD and DVCProHD and FCP reports the difference correctly from the camera sources I’ve used.

Page 1 of 2

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