[Martin Stanesby]

Yes Grazie, to be clear I have tried and tested de-interlace and this was fine and looks ok, as mentioned in the post. However, I am wanting this footage to remain interlaced.
As mentioned in my reply to John, I have concluded the field lines will be visible in my work flow as I am viewing on a progressive monitor until either played on DVD (my test worked fine) or broadcasted.

I had this below reply with regards to the zooming/cropping which was making it look worse:

“OK
I’m assuming you understand that in interlaced footage, the camera alternately records odd and even scan lines In other words filming at 1080/50i The image is split into 1080 lines and in the first 50th of a second the camera records 540 “even” lines with the image in position “A”, then in the next 50th of a second it will record the “odd” lines of the image in position “B”, so if you superimpose the first image onto the second you will get a very fine “comb” effect.

But, in the normal course of events, we don’t superimpose one on top of the other we show them alternately and our eyes are tricked into seeing a nice smooth motion image.

Now imagine what happens if you zoom in – lets say to double height.
Each one of your lines now takes up the height that two lines previously took up so your “odd” line is now split across one odd and one even “output” line (for want of a better way of describing it). In other words half of the image from the lines that were in “position A” are now being replaved on the second 1/50th of a second. Depending on how much you zoom in, you can see that the effect of doing this will differ which is exactly the phenomenon we can see above.

You need to de-interlace any footage if you are going to zoom even if your output will be interlaced.

(It took me a while to understand this as well as it sounds contrary to what we are trying to do).”

So I’m clearer now.
Thanks
Martin

[Martin Stanesby]

Hi John,
Thanks for the response.

Yes you are correct it is set to none. However, it’s no de-interlacing that I’m wanting to do. This does resolve the issue by de-interlacing, but I needed to produce an interlaced 50i project which may be used for broadcast.

I have since done some tests and found the combing field lines are visible on my work flow on a PC monitor due to the monitor being progressive. Once produced a clip on DVD it resolved this fine. However, the zooming in on an interlaced clip of footage would need to be de-interlaced first as this, so I’ve now heard, cannot be done as it makes the field lines worse effectively.

Martin

[Martin Stanesby]

Thank you both for your replies.

I always disable resample.
The C100 setting was AVCHD 50i so I’m sure it was, and it looks so different to my progressive footage. I didn’t match media, maybe I should see what it suggests if I did, but the media settings gs are the same as the clip properties.

I am seeing this within sony vegas pro time line.

Thanks again for your help.
Martin

[Martin Stanesby]

Hi Riggan,
Yeah I get what you mean. I didn’t really get any help with BCC itself.
It’s been a while since, and I didn’t end up using BCC optical flow as I never got on with it to find a realistic slo-mo solution. Instead in opted for Twixtor. This works well at really super slow. However, with all plugins they aren’t faultless and I found Twixtor will ‘morph’ bits of footage if it’s too complicated in that frame….meaning too much going on. So the more simple the shot the better Twixtor is able to place the extra frames to work well.
If you search Twixtor in Youtube there’s a link to a free download :).
However, if you are wanting to master BCC optical flow then I suggest John Rofrano for advice as he’s the master of BCC on Sony Vegas who posts on here and has tutorials too.

Hope that helps.
Martin

[Martin Stanesby]

Hi Steve,
Thanks for the solution. I should be more careful in future and really learn what every facility on Vegas does.
Thanks very much.

Martin

[Martin Stanesby]

Hi Warren, thanks for the reply. I would use 1/50 shutter speed if shooting 25fps but not at 50fps. In manual mode you cannot get that low anyway, 60 for is the limit, any lower and a lot of blur could enter a moving image. 1/100 should be fine at 50fps and is the optimum setting, staying here usually makes sur e you don’t get banding in certain lighting….but not in this case.

Thanks for the tip about Magic Lantern…..do you think this would solve my problem by using 14 bit with Magic Lantern then?

Thanks again.
Martin

[Martin Stanesby]

Warren,
As per my post, i’m shooting 50fps (UK) therefore the 1/100 shutter speed, im not ahooting at 25fps, and this won’t produce anything near a gritty (or staccato as you out it) effect.
For film this is better for manipulation of slow-mo effects etc. This isn’t stills.

However, this is not the issue or the focal point to my post.

[Martin Stanesby]

Hi Steve,
Thanks for the repky.
No this isn’t the case. When I got to another area of the hotel, a dimmer area, the banding does not happen. When I get closer to this area with the windows the banding gets more visible.

I’m confused.

Martin

[Martin Stanesby]

Hi Wayne,
Ok, So I changed and saved the render setting as you showed (although this doesn’t delete the original one so I don’t know how Mecalli decides which one to use?)
However, this didn’t make any difference.

I changed the project settings to 1080 but this didn’t work either 🙁

I appreciate you trying so far.

Martin

[Martin Stanesby]

Hi Wayne,
Thanks for the reply.

Ok, I see that and I’ve made the change, but I’m a bit confused here. These are render settings but I’m using Mercalli plugin within Vegas? If I make the alteration you suggested then i would need to render out a project using this setting but I’m not doing that? I’ve saved the setting but no point me clicking ‘render’??

Am I missing something

Thanks
Martin