-
Very confused about interlace now
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Sometimes I spend a little time looking though all the keyboard shortcuts”
What?
You read the manual?
Isn’t that what forums are for?
-
[Robert Brown] “bring your shot into a 25P timeline and render”
There are no “p” timelines in AE.
Field order (or not) is set in the output module before render.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “There are no “p” timelines in AE.”
Dude what is your deal? I answered the guys question when you didn’t and now you’re nit picking my answer. But if you are going to nit pick you should get your facts straight. ALL AE timelines are in fact P, but yeah interlacing if any is added on the way out. Jeez. If I’ve learned anything in 20 years of video it’d be fields and frames. And if you think FCP does great with interlaced well then…
Robert Brown
Editor/VFX/Colorist – FCP, Smoke, Quantel Pablo, After Effects, 3DS MAX, Premiere Prohttps://vimeo.com/user3987510/videos
-
When you say add it to a “p” timeline, perhaps that implies there’s an “i” timeline? There are just timelines in AE, you can define frame size and frame rate, but not interlacing, so if someone told me to add something to a p timeline in AE, I’d go looking on how to do that. Interlacing is handled in the output module.
Just trying to help and I meant no offense.
Fields Kit offers more controls, as does Compressor, just FYI. You can choose what you’d like/looks best.
Oh, and by the way, FCP7 renders interlacing just fine. I’d be happy to discuss how you think it doesn’t, besides the proper rendering of 3:2 pulldown, which FCPX does correctly by the way.
-
[Kevin Patrick] “What?
You read the manual?
Isn’t that what forums are for?”
😀 Absolutely.
-
Well “P” or progressive is one of those words like non-drop frame. The name wouldn’t exist if there wasn’t this other thing out there as non-drop would be just called time code, and and I guess we would just say fps and there would be no I or P if interlaced had been invented. But AE treats video or frames as P which just means every pixel in the frame gets output at the same time vs interlaced where half goes out as a chunk then the other half right after.
The reason I always thought FCP was weak in this was just from coming from a linear background where vendors who really knew video set the bar. FCP as far as I can tell when doing a slo mo processes full frames and doesn’t break apart the fields. I haven’t cut sd a while in FCP but I remember having to turn frame blending on for any slo mo which was pretty bad in comparison to Beta SP and Digi Beta and if you turned frame blending off they were totally unacceptable. Yeah there were fields kit, and Twixtor etc but all of that stuff seemed really slow. Avid which I’ve never been a huge fan of at least gave you different modes for slo mos and they got the closest I’d seen to the way VTSs were before. I always wanted AE like controls in FCP and so the Adobe suite to me is the best for all of that as you can deal with 3:2 pulldown or whatever and it’s spot on.
But like I mentioned before progressive works great in FCP. And since here at Fox were 720P we don’t have to deal with all of that anymore.
Robert Brown
Editor/VFX/Colorist – FCP, Smoke, Quantel Pablo, After Effects, 3DS MAX, Premiere Prohttps://vimeo.com/user3987510/videos
-
[Robert Brown] “And since here at Fox were 720P we don’t have to deal with all of that anymore.”
I hear that. I personally want interlaced video to die a slow, agonizing death.
Oh wait, it already is. Maybe it could go a little faster?
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
Yeah I was really disappointed to see both interlaced and 29.97 still around after HD showed up.
Robert Brown
Editor/VFX/Colorist – FCP, Smoke, Quantel Pablo, After Effects, 3DS MAX, Premiere Prohttps://vimeo.com/user3987510/videos
-
HD was 1080i in the 70s.
Had to follow the standards of the time,(especially old satellites I believe, certainly CRTs) which expected interlaced SD.
-
“HD was 1080i in the 70s. ”
Early HD was analog and double NTSC/PAL lines so not strictly 1080 as that is a digital pixel dimension. John Logie Beard, the inventor of TV had HD concepts but there was no display technology capable. Interlacing was and still is a useful way of increasing spatial resolution. SD broadcast will be around for a while and it will remain interlaced so this is an issue that must be dealt with on a daily basis by editors and post people like myself.
I use an LCD via Kona3 to display interlace problems like reversed fields, something that is best fixed before deinterlacing as problems can be baked in when deinterlacing, depending on field blending used.
Slo mos with reversed fields cannot be fixed by deinterlacing. There are many reasons why an edit system needs to be able to output a proper reference image to a monitor capable of displaying interlaced and true rec 709 spec for grading.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up