Creative Communities of the World Forums

The peer to peer support community for media production professionals.

Activity Forums Apple Final Cut Pro Legacy upres P2 720 24PN footage to 1080 24p

  • Darius Fisher

    December 7, 2007 at 8:26 am

    Great answers, Jeremy, Thanks!

    I’m mostly really warming to the idea of using the 1400 but … I must reiterate my first question;

    1) “How do the results (of the 1400’s hardware upconvert) compare to say the Kona 3, or doing it in an FCP timeline, or with compressor or Teranex or Snell and Wilcox boxes?

    You have made it very clear that the 1400 can remove either type of pulldown without a problem which is great!
    Also, the aspect ratio, full frame 16:9 issue seems a non-issue, also great.

    But for the other methods; i.e.

    a) Software or Desktop solutions; FCP/Kona3/Compressor/InstanHD/Magic Bullet/BCC5 Uprez etc., and then

    b) dedicated facility based Hardware solutions; i.e.

    Teranex; (mini/VC100/300/600) or

    Snell and Wilcox’s boxes; (Alchemist Platinum Ph.C, Quasar Ph.C, Ukon)

    … I’m mostly concerned about how their upscaling quality compares with the 1400’s (and not so interested in their pulldown removal ability since, as you rightly said, that should be done first using RSFields kit or such like for software solutions,

    (Teranex and Snell and Wilcox is a whole ‘nother ball of wax’ – each with their own strengths and weaknesses as far as fields or pulldown detection and removal)

    I’d so love to do a shoot out of all these solutions and all the common sources.

    But anyway, once again, how good is the 1400’s up-convert? How does it compare?
    thanks again


    Once I knew everything

  • Darius Fisher

    December 7, 2007 at 8:31 am

    Great answers, Jeremy, Thanks!

    I’m mostly really warming to the idea of using the 1400 but … I must reiterate my first question;

    1) “How do the results (of the 1400’s hardware upconvert) compare to say the Kona 3, or doing it in an FCP timeline, or with compressor or Teranex or Snell and Wilcox boxes?

    You have made it very clear that the 1400 can remove either type of pulldown without a problem which is great!
    Also, the aspect ratio, full frame 16:9 issue seems a non-issue, also great.

    But for the other methods; i.e.

    a) Software or Desktop solutions; FCP/Kona3/Compressor/InstanHD/Magic Bullet/BCC5 Uprez etc., and then

    b) dedicated facility based Hardware solutions; i.e.

    Teranex; (mini/VC100/300/600) or

    Snell and Wilcox’s boxes; (Alchemist Platinum Ph.C, Quasar Ph.C, Ukon)

    … I’m mostly concerned about how their upscaling quality compares with the 1400’s and not so interested in their pulldown removal ability since, as you rightly said, that should be done first using RSFields kit or such like for software solutions,

    (Teranex and Snell and Wilcox is a whole ‘nother ball of wax’ – each with their own strengths and weaknesses as far as fields or pulldown detection and removal)

    I’d so love to do a shoot out of all these solutions and all the common sources.

    But anyway, once again, how good is the 1400’s up-convert? How does it compare?
    thanks again


    Once I knew everything

  • Jeremy Garchow

    December 7, 2007 at 3:35 pm

    I thought my last answer pretty much laid it out. In my opinion, this would be the order of quality

    Kona = OK, fields are screwed
    Timeline = OK, fields are screwed until you fix them
    1400 = pretty good, with pulldown removal. no retiming or field fixing
    Compressor = Your mileage may vary, but if going 24p to 24p, you might be surprised at how good it is, recommend to fix your fields first (i.e. remove pulldown)
    Teranex/Alchemist = No doubt about it, best quality but you will pay for it.

    I heart AJA, but I personally think the deck does a better job of upconvert than the Kona in this case, simply because of the 24p conversion/pulldown removal.

    Does that make more sense?

    Jeremy

  • Darius Fisher

    December 7, 2007 at 5:13 pm

    Your experience of the results in order is very helpful. Thanks Jeremy!
    (In your previous reply you didn’t actually comment on the 1400’s results from a scaling perspective alone 🙂

    I think I will need to do a test on a weekend with a rented 1400 and teranex mini UPC 4F. (I have a bunch of 29.97 DV also to get to 23.98PsF 1080) Has anyone used a teranex mini and gotten good results?

    Regards

    Darius Fisher

    Once I knew everything

  • Jeremy Garchow

    December 7, 2007 at 5:23 pm

    The Teranex mini won’t give you 1080p23.98.

    Jeremy

  • Darius Fisher

    December 7, 2007 at 6:56 pm

    The reason for getting both would be to R and D what would produce the best results with some hardware assistance. The Mini might be more useful for de-interlacing and up converting the 59.94i SD material on Beta and DV and therefore worth renting for a weekend.

    For the 24p and 24pA DV material, I thought it might also be worth seeing what the results are like using a deck like the 1400 to spit (pull down removed) 23.98PsF SD out of SDI and then using the Mini to upres to 1080 only (using it’s superior scaling, edge detection, sharpening, edge contrast enhancing algorithms etc. to get a better upres?

    Darius Fisher

    Once I knew everything

  • Jeremy Garchow

    December 7, 2007 at 8:09 pm

    [Darius Fisher] “I thought it might also be worth seeing what the results are like using a deck like the 1400 to spit (pull down removed) 23.98PsF SD out of SDI and then using the Mini to upres to 1080 only (using it’s superior scaling, edge detection, sharpening, edge contrast enhancing algorithms etc. to get a better upres?”

    The deck won’t spit out 23.98 SD only 29.97, unfortunately. It will play out 1080psf @ 23.98.

    I am all for R and D. I think your plan is good. The main thing is you will have to weigh is spatial vs temporal quality. If all you care about is scaling, then the teranex mini will be great but your temporal quality will suffer. The spatial scaling of the deck will be less than that of the teranex, but the temporal quality will be spot on.

    Testing is good. If you do end up testing, write back and let me know how it all worked out. I always like to hear what decisions people make.

    Jeremy

  • Darius Fisher

    December 7, 2007 at 9:00 pm

    Jeremy,
    Thanks again. I’m now trying to track down a deck. Can any other decks do the same as the 1400? (specifically the pulldown removal with 24p/24pA letterboxed mini DV, TC30-TC24 and upconvert to 23.98PsF 1080 out the HD/SDI)

    AJ-HD1200/AJ-HD1700/AJ-HD1800?

    It’ll make it easier for me to find one (borrow:-) if other decks can do this also. For example, I know I could borrow a 1200. This is a low budget Doc after all.

    kind regards,

    Darius Fisher

    Once I knew everything

  • Jeremy Garchow

    December 7, 2007 at 9:39 pm

    I know the 1200 will work, not sure about the others.

Page 2 of 2

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