Creative Communities of the World Forums

The peer to peer support community for media production professionals.

Activity Forums DVD Authoring interlacing vs. progressive-i almost get it…

  • interlacing vs. progressive-i almost get it…

    Posted by Mindy Hilt on January 10, 2006 at 12:43 pm

    Hi guys,
    I’ve struggled for months to make pretty dvd’s. My biggest issue is making ones that look good on both computers and tv’s. Luckily, my shooters are shooting everything progressive now and it’s going great. Now I have a client who gave me a 20 minute Beta tape and asked for a dvd of it. We did some nice menus in Adobe Encore, and all that’s left is the video. I captured 30i in Avid, then compress with Sorenson Squeeze. But when I tell sorenson to make it progressive, it doesn’t seem to. I.E. looks great on a TV, but I get the horizontal lines during motion on the computer. But if I tell Sorenson to deinterlace, then the parts of the video that have cg’s, looks all jagged and cruddy.
    Is it not possible? I thought making it progressive would be the answer…would play smooth on a computer and fine on a progressive scan dvd player.
    Any thoughts would be appreciated. I’m to the point where I have to tell my client, “sorry, can’t be done.”

    Arnie Schlissel replied 20 years, 5 months ago 3 Members · 5 Replies
  • 5 Replies
  • Mindy Hilt

    January 10, 2006 at 1:37 pm

    Also…will it help if I run the footage through a deinterlacer like Magic Bullet or ReelSmart Fields Kit? Then treat it like progressive footage?

    Also, is the problem the Avid-Sorenson-Encore workflow? One crazy idea i had was to layoff the program to a DV tape and digitize via firewire into my other PC which has premiere. From there I can export right to Encore. I’ve done that many times and never had field issues, but there will be a quality loss going from Beta to DVCam.

    Just a thought.

  • Eric Pautsch

    January 10, 2006 at 4:30 pm

    NEVER deinterlace your footage if it was shot interlaced..you lose half your temporal information. The perfect situation would be to have all progressive footage then to set the P flags during the encodes. This would look great on both computers and set tops.

    Players actually add the 3:2 cadence when going through the composite output.

  • Mindy Hilt

    January 10, 2006 at 4:46 pm

    Yes, ideally the footage would be progressive, but in this case it is not. It is a program edited somewhere else and sent to me on a Beta tape. I am captuing into the Avid at 2:1. It is definitely interlaced to begin with. So is it right to tell the client that they CANNOT have a dvd from that that will look clean on both a TV and a computer?

    Or do you mean that if they send it from their dvd player to their tv via a different cable (svideo, composite rca, component) they will see different results? Because it actually looks fine on the TV, just not on the computer which is how most of the end users will be viewing it.

    Sorry for all the questions, I’m lost. Would using the FCP-DVDSP workflow solve my problems?

  • Eric Pautsch

    January 11, 2006 at 3:09 am

    If your main concern is that you need it to looks good on a computer then I would go with Progressive. This case is definetly am exception though. Alot of deinterlacers out there do a good job. I guess it all depend on how your end users are going to use your DVD.

  • Arnie Schlissel

    January 12, 2006 at 5:54 pm

    If you can deinterlace by either blending or blurring the 2 fields, then you might be able to get a DVD to look ok on both computer & video. I’ve had moderate success using Apple’s Compressor 1.x & DVDSP versions 2 & 3.

    Arnie
    https://www.arniepix.com

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