Interlacing And Compression Issues

[rdeditor]

I've got a Quicktime movie that I'm trying to burn to Blu Ray and when the disc is done there are several problems with it. The movie is 9:16 in length and a little over 101mg and it is 1920x1080 59.94.

The video is actually shot 29.976 progressive or film scanned the same so there shouldn't be any interlacing issues but there are places where a 4 frame fade to and from white is used as a transitional element. On the Blu Ray instead of smooth fades it almost looks like there is an interlacing issue with definite lines in the fade.

The entire output where there is quite a bit of motion, it looks like it is stuttering, almost like it's recording maybe 15fps.

There are several places where in a light gray cloudy sky, it looks almost posterized. Very bad compression issues.

In Creator I'm using the "Create DVD" module, HQ encoding settings and two pass encoding.

We're needing to send this disc to a TV network for final approval to trigger a series so it needs to be as good as possible.

I've included 3 images, two showing the interlacing and one compression. On a small jpg file like this it's hard to see the compression issues but the interlacing should be apparent.

Any suggestions on how to resolve the compression, interlacing, stuttering issues?

Thanks

[ggrussell]

Would appear that you haven't chosen the correct MyDVD project setting. Open MyDVD and load your project. Go to the menu FILE and select Project Settings. On the right under default encoding, select HQ which is 1920x1080p. You can then choose AVC or MPEG 2. That's all the settings that I know.

[rdeditor]

Would appear that you haven't chosen the correct MyDVD project setting. Open MyDVD and load your project. Go to the menu FILE and select Project Settings. On the right under default encoding, select HQ which is 1920x1080p. You can then choose AVC or MPEG 2. That's all the settings that I know.

 

Thanks for the reply, I did choose those settings but selected AVC. I guess I'll try MPEG2 and see if it gives me any better results.

[ggrussell]

What were you watching the disc on? PC or HDTV? Download Media Info (free) and load the .mts file. Media Info will tell you if the file is really progressive or not.

Edited October 6, 2010 by ggrussell

[rdeditor]

What were you watching the disc on? PC or HDTV? Download Media Info (free) and load the .mts file. Media Info will tell you if the file is really progressive or not.

 

Well I know my source footage is truly progressive because it was shot on a Sony HDWF900R @ 29.97 and edited on an Avid DS/Nitris. I viewed the Blu Ray on a PC, a HDTV through HDMI, and reimported back into the DS. All ways it has interlacing, stuttering, and compression issues.

I'm wondering if Creator can't handle such a large source movie. Unfortunately when I made the same movie using PhotoJPEG, H264, and MPEG-2 the compression artifacts were unusable

[malatekid]

I'm wondering if Creator can't handle such a large source movie.

9:16 is 9 minutes and 16 secs? I had a project using multiple mts files that are bigger in size (gb) and longer than that duration. The project was fine.

[rdeditor]

9:16 is 9 minutes and 16 secs? I had a project using multiple mts files that are bigger in size (gb) and longer than that duration. The project was fine.

 

Yes 9 minutes 16 seconds. Were you able to see the interlacing on the sample file?

 

System

HP XW8400

Vista Business 64 - SP2

Dual Intel Xeon E5345 2.33GHz processors

16GB Ram

NVIDIA Quadro FX3500

[malatekid]

You have a sample file? I can try it later in the evening; I have no access right now to a computer that has Creator 2011.

[rdeditor]

You have a sample file? I can try it later in the evening; I have no access right now to a computer that has Creator 2011.

 

I'll try to output a small 4 second segment. Sorry, I misspoke regarding file size, my 9 minute 16 second source file is 101,293,636KB which I believe is 101GB not MB

[malatekid]

I'll try to output a small 4 second segment. Sorry, I misspoke regarding file size, my 9 minute 16 second source file is 101,293,636KB which I believe is 101GB not MB

Are you sure it's KB, not Bytes? If it is Bytes, then your original quote of 101MB sounds reasonable.

 

For a video clip of 9 min, 16 secs duration, you could not have that 101GB file size! If you have a 500GB hard drive, this clip would already occupy 20% of the hard drive.

[rdeditor]

Are you sure it's KB, not Bytes? If it is Bytes, then your original quote of 101MB sounds reasonable.

 

For a video clip of 9 min, 16 secs duration, you could not have that 101GB file size! If you have a 500GB hard drive, this clip would already occupy 20% of the hard drive.

 

Yes, that's what the file says in explorer KB. I asked our IT guy and he confirmed that it's 101GB. I just did an initial test on 4 seconds and it's 1.37GB. The files are on an Avid Unity with a total of 80TB and a virtual workspace of 1TB. The whole system is hardware and software striped and running to my system over fiber from the fiber channel drive array.

[rdeditor]

Yes, that's what the file says in explorer KB. I asked our IT guy and he confirmed that it's 101GB. I just did an initial test on 4 seconds and it's 1.37GB. The files are on an Avid Unity with a total of 80TB and a virtual workspace of 1TB. The whole system is hardware and software striped and running to my system over fiber from the fiber channel drive array.

 

One frame of video is a little over 12mg so an uncompressed 9 minute 16 second video at 30fps is huge

[rdeditor]

Okay, I've figured out the problem, just don't know how to fix it. Apparently the footage was shot on a Panasonic AJ-HDC27H VariCam at 1920x1080 23.976fps which is actually 23.976 over 59.94, thus introducing 3:2 pulldown. So when I make the QuickTime movie and go through it frame by frame I can see the 3:2 cadence. Unfortunately when making a QuickTime from my timeline I don't have any way to fix that on a global basis. I'd have to take each shot individually, remove the camera 3:2, and then motion blend each individual shot to get it back to my correctly timed sequence.

[gi7omy]

On a slightly different topic - the shot of the Kette of Me262s would be fine - that colour sky is typical of what we get this side of the pond - grey and murky

[ggrussell]

The files are on an Avid Unity with a total of 80TB and a virtual workspace of 1TB. The whole system is hardware and software striped and running to my system over fiber from the fiber channel drive array.

This may be a silly question, but if you are using all this high end camcorders and equipment, why did you choose to use a Suite of applications that is aimed at consumer editing? Since you already have Avid equip, why not Avid (like Media Composer for the Nitris) video editing software which I'm sure could probably handle the 3:2 pull-down. My consumer Canon HV20 also has 24fps and it's nothing but a nightmare regardless of what consumer editor I tired. So I stick to the NTSC frame rates. Edited October 7, 2010 by ggrussell

[rdeditor]

This may be a silly question, but if you are using all this high end camcorders and equipment, why did you choose to use a Suite of applications that is aimed at consumer editing? Since you already have Avid equip, why not Avid (like Media Composer for the Nitris) video editing software which I'm sure could probably handle the 3:2 pull-down. My consumer Canon HV20 also has 24fps and it's nothing but a nightmare regardless of what consumer editor I tired. So I stick to the NTSC frame rates.

 

Well apparently the reason they used the 24pa mode is to sell the show to the network. They wanted a film feel which is hard to achieve without doing it in camera. Yes, the Avid will remove the 3:2 pulldown but only on a shot by shot basis. Now that the show is onlined, I'd have to go back, drop a container on each shot, figure out the A frame, motion effect the shot to get it back to the proper length and move on to the next shot. Also, unfortunately the offline editors didn't pay attention to the A frame and just cut anywhere, B,C,D, etc.

Then the Avid won't burn Blu Ray's. We'd have to use another program for that, hence Roxio. This was just thrown at me on Monday, the company doesn't want to spend 10 grand on a professional authoring burning solution for a one off so we were hoping this would work for a one shot job. Our last hope is to record it to HDCAM-SR, redigitize that back into the system, make a QuickTime of that and see if it works better. Otherwise we'll have to pay $600 to have an outside company make the Blu Ray from the HDCAM-SR and $50 for each copy, which we need 6.

[ggrussell]

My personal opinion, the 'film look' is over rated. There are all kinds of tricks like color destaturation that give a certain look without 3:2 pull down. But that's just me. I would venture to say this is first time we've had anyone use Roxio to sell a show to a network.

 

If you can find away to convert the 24p to standard format you need (NTSC or PAL), MyDVD could probably burn that to Bluray for you. Believe it or not, some shareware or freeware apps might help you there like VirtualDub.

[rdeditor]

My personal opinion, the 'film look' is over rated. There are all kinds of tricks like color destaturation that give a certain look without 3:2 pull down. But that's just me. I would venture to say this is first time we've had anyone use Roxio to sell a show to a network.

 

If you can find away to convert the 24p to standard format you need (NTSC or PAL), MyDVD could probably burn that to Bluray for you. Believe it or not, some shareware or freeware apps might help you there like VirtualDub.

 

I so totally agree you with the film look thing. On a daily basis I use Sapphire and Boris and Cinelook and no matter what setting I use and how much I tweak the colors, if it doesn't have that 3:2 cadence look, the execs kick it back every time. Sometimes I'll put a motion effect on the footage and just use duplicated frames so it'll be 30fps but they still flag it. Drives me insane.

[ggrussell]

if it doesn't have that 3:2 cadence look

I doubt that any of the intended audience would even notice if it wasn't there. LOL Especially if the show is being broadcast and with all these fancy HDTV with 120hz and 240hz, wouldn't it be a moot point?

[rdeditor]

I doubt that any of the intended audience would even notice if it wasn't there. LOL Especially if the show is being broadcast and with all these fancy HDTV with 120hz and 240hz, wouldn't it be a moot point?

 

I often ask that same question but they feel that cinematic look gives them an advantage with the network execs approving the show. They think it gives the show a higher production value look which they hope sets them apart from the competition.

[Jim_Hardin]

Unless you are running your own business, your hands are pretty much tied…

 

It is their decision, not yours to question

[ggrussell]

If it was going to be shown in a theater with DLP projector, I might agree, but not broadcast TV.