-
Fields causing cheezy look to motion.
I’ve created a project in which I composited some DV characters into scenes shot on Film and transfered to Beta and DVCAM. We captured from the DVCAM and did the composites. They look perfect. The only problem is that if the composites are rendered with fields they look very FAKE on screen. They have a very video-y computer-y look when the characters move. If I render without fields, the motion looks great but the film backgrounds have nasty blocky edges on the objects in the shot. I experimented with different shutter angles and tried a number of things to get it to look right. I tried interpreting the footage without fields and rendering it without fields, the blockiness was gone but any side to side motion looked crazy. Is there any way I can get those film backgrounds to not be blocky and still render the composites without fields? Any way at all? I’d personally rather have it look blocky than have cheesy fake motion, but I’d love to have my cake and eat it too. I was thinking maybe a de-interlacing plugin might exist that I could add to an adjustment layer in all 50 composites over the film backgrounds but below the DV characters. Is that possible?
Thanks,
M@
-
3 Replies
-
Thank you for responding,
I know what a 3:2 pulldown is. I understand exactly how and why it works. I’m not in need of a film lesson, I’ve been shooting and editing film for some time. I’m in need of after effects help because that is what I’m currently learning. I have not composited footage shot on film in the past. A week ago I suggested 3:2 pulldown as a possible problem…
“Maybe there is something I’m missing in interpretation or comp settings. Could it be a Pulldown problem? The beta footage originated on film and I used SSWWW. Perhaps this is the issue?”
M@
but I operated under the assumption that this was not actually the problem because of this message.
“You only need to remove pulldown if you want to work with complete frames at 23.976 fps. Otherwise, just separate fields (LFF most likely) and work in 29.97 fps.”
Which I assumed meant that it only affected my footage to remove pulldown if I wanted to edit in a 24fps sequence.
So I said…
[Footbaggin] “What should happen to the video if you do what I’ve done and Remove Pulldown when you don’t need to?”
and was told…
Then you’d have a 23.976 fps clip running in a 29.97 fps comp. Some of the frames of the footage will be repeated, some will not. It’s generally not a good thing to do.
And I have to keep 29.97fps comps because I’m compositing in DVCAM footage on top of the film. Hence my problem. I have done my research. I will figure out the problem.
-
The problem I ran into when doing this earlier in the week was that after removing pulldown many clips were strobing. I have discovered that several clips were incorrectly phased in AE wheich was causing this problem. I solved the problem last night by having AE determine the phase for all 200 or so clips individually by going through them one by one and telling AE to guess the phase. (Last time I had applied the interpretation to all the clips overlooking the fact that the phase would not be guessed for all of them but rather set to whatever the first one was.) This had been the mistake. I linked these clips to my existing 29.97fps DVCAM composites and rendered them at 29.97fps. About 20 minutes ago my render from last night finished and all 50 composites are perfect. The blocky edges are gone and the motion is flawless.
-
Yeah … generally the pulldown is added to all the shots spliced together in one go. Once we start looking at the separate clips, we find that they have different pulldown phases because they don’t all start at the same point in the phase. For example:
If we have SSWWWSSWWWSSWWWSSWWW, but the content of shot 2 actually starts at a W, then its phase could be WWWSS.Unfortunately, there’s no way around this, unless you remove pulldown for the whole clip, and drag it into the comp, changing the in/out points for each instance of the clip. Feh. Either way, a bunch of short clips can be a bit inconvenient.
Sorry you had to go through all that …
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up