Ok, is this progressive now (picture)?

[HD4me]

Edit: Problem solved thanks to this link,
http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/0...-24p-pulldown/

(of course, and also your valuable help here )

I have been doing some tests, and this is a test after exporting/hoping I properly removed the interlacing with 24p.

I can also upload the video, as it's only about 50mb.
I don't notice the "lines" that were in it before, so I think it's P now instead of i, but of course, I could be wrong. Most of the time you can notice interlacing via the motion blur in footage, but this time, it just seems like normal motion blur without any lines going through it. Also, when I select "de-interlace" with VLC player on a video that's already progressive, then the screen goes green, and it does that with this clip too, so I think it worked, I hope it did, that is.

[lordtangent]

This just looks field blended to me. But it could be the ghost is a result of flickery lighting. (from the monitor) How are you processing it and can you upload the un-processed clip?

[HD4me]

Here's the video (about 50mb),
http://rapidshare.com/files/64593621/typing.divx.html

[lordtangent]

The clip you put up is 29.97fps is it from 60i stuff?

It definitly looks field blended to me. So while the frames might now be "progressive" they don't look as good as they could if you did smart delacing (or IVTC if it's from 24sp material)

What is the source? 60i? 24sp?

[HD4me]

It is 24p (HV20 set to 1080 24p).

Not quite sure what I'm doing wrong.

If it's 29 then apparently I must have clicked on something or not checked a setting so it converted 24 into 29, I guess.

[HD4me]

Ok, going to try this one soon,
http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/0...-24p-pulldown/

[SSzudzik]

An excellent choice if I do say so myself

You can also use the Vegas Plugin equivalent of the HV20Pulldown application if you are working in Vegas. Can save you some time... Notes about that are in the Farnsworth sticky thread above..

--Steve

[butterflies]

Please note that if you are a consumer and you don’t have a “pro” NLE, Sony Vegas Movie Studio 8 Platinum and Adobe Premiere LE 3 are the only consumer-priced NLEs that (unofficially) support 24p timelines — so if you want to work with 24p, make sure you have bought the right video editor. Does this mean that I will not be able to captureand edit 24p stuff from hv20 with Premiere Pro 7.0?

[Frank]

Please note that if you are a consumer and you don’t have a “pro” NLE, Sony Vegas Movie Studio 8 Platinum and Adobe Premiere LE 3 are the only consumer-priced NLEs that (unofficially) support 24p timelines — so if you want to work with 24p, make sure you have bought the right video editor. Does this mean that I will not be able to captureand edit 24p stuff from hv20 with Premiere Pro 7.0?

Two points:

1. 24p from the HV20 comes wrapped in 60i, so you can edit it as a 60i stream in any NLE that accepts MPEG-2 format. If you are mastering for television viewing, this is all you need to do to get a result equivalent to a telecined movie with pulldown such as is shown on TV all the time.

2. I use Premiere Elements 3.0, and my workflow consists of deinterlace/remove pulldown (DVFilm Maker), import into PE3, edit, export at 23.976 fps. I end up with a true 24p master. Even though you can't create a 24p project in PE3, it recognizes the frame rate of imported footage and plays it correctly, and you can output at any frame rate you choose.
I assume the same is true of Premiere Pro.

[HD4me]

Yes, progressive HAS BEEN ACHEIVED and wow, does it look great uncompressed, progressive.

Thanks everyone here, and thanks Eugenia (http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/0...-24p-pulldown/) for helping me get it done in Windows.

[butterflies]

Two points:

1. 24p from the HV20 comes wrapped in 60i, so you can edit it as a 60i stream in any NLE that accepts MPEG-2 format. If you are mastering for television viewing, this is all you need to do to get a result equivalent to a telecined movie with pulldown such as is shown on TV all the time.

2. I use Premiere Elements 3.0, and my workflow consists of deinterlace/remove pulldown (DVFilm Maker), import into PE3, edit, export at 23.976 fps. I end up with a true 24p master. Even though you can't create a 24p project in PE3, it recognizes the frame rate of imported footage and plays it correctly, and you can output at any frame rate you choose.
I assume the same is true of Premiere Pro.

If it is so easy with DVFilm Maker then why is there this complex method everything is talking about: http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/0...-24p-pulldown/

Please let me ask you some stupid question. It seems that you have patience for beginners:
1 Why can the HV20 not record true 24P (or why did canon develop such a stupid process with unusable product)
2 What is the background behind the filmic quality of 24p footage? How do you explain that our eyes observe this quality?
3 Could you show me (link me to) an example in which it is really visable that 24p differs from 50i or 60i, other then on a HDTV

Many thanks

[Ian-T]

To your #1. question.....this is true 24p. This (with the exception of Canon leaving out the flags) is the same way 24p has been recorded for years. They left out the flags because it's a consumer camera. They figured consumers would not be interested in editing on a pro level....but...there are obviously many work arounds to the missing flag issue.

#2. The 24p is just mimicking the cadence of film (the movies we watch on the "big-screen" theaters). This gives motion a more surreal or non-reality look. I beieve it originated back in the early days of film and had a lot to do with economics. But growing up watching movies our eyes have become used to identifying 24 frames per second as the "dreamy" movie look. Video on the other hand is very "clean"...like reality TV or Soap Operas etc.

#3 I don't have the exact link...but if you go to the Canon Website they have examples of the HV20's 60i and 24p.

I don't think DV Film Maker removes pulldown...it deinterlaces 60i footage and turns it into 24p....but that is through conversion and is not real 24 progressive frames (plus it's better to have true as opposed to software conversion...but that is debatable). The HV20 shoots "real" 24 progressive frames...but the way it stores it is broken down intto 60 interlaced frames (this is an HDV standard which Canon adheres to)...but nevertheless...it is true 24p (no matter what some frustrated folks might want to say about it). Another example of a cam that adds pulldown to its footage would be the famed DVX cam...the difference is the cam adds flags to its footage so that NLE's like Sony Vegas, Avid, Premier Pro etc. can easily identify the extra frames and remove them with no problem.....but remember....that is a pro-sumer cam....the manufacturer (in this cas Panasonic) expect professionals to use this cam in professional environments with NLE's like Sony Vegas, Avid, PPro etc. Canon did not figure out that there would be a community like this one who would find "other" means of removing pulldown.

Edit: You can always film in 60i only and have DV Film Maker, Vegas, or any of the NLE's that support 24p deinterlace you footage. But if you shoot with a 24p cam like the HV20 and deinterlaced you will have problems in the footage because ...as mentioned before....there are no flags embedded in the footage...and the software will remove the wrong "extra' frames resulting in some ghosting in your footage. This is why people here went through all the trouble to find a way to remove the correct interlaced frames from the HV20. I hope all of this helps a little.

Edit#2. By the way....the 24p wrapped in 60i.....is different from the regular 60i (so to speak). What I mean is 24p in 60i needs pulldown removed (HV20Pulldown.exe etc.).....60i just needs to be deinterlaced (DVFilm Maker or any NLE).

[butterflies]

Ian-T,
This is very helpfull, cause understandable language. Thanks!
Is nobody working on some consumer software to do the puling down (to through 24p) in a more comfortable way. There seems to be a market for that. Guys like me would have it. I am not able, without spending much more time and energy on learning things I don't even want to know, to do it the hard way (http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/0...-24p-pulldown/). Really, It's not lazyness, I just want to spend the little free time I have doing the nice things. I am just an amateur.

By the way: how bad is the ghosting as a result of removing the 'wrong' frames by programs like DVFilm Maker (among amateurs)?

[Ian-T]

By the way: how bad is the ghosting as a result of removing the 'wrong' frames by programs like DVFilm Maker (among amateurs)?

It's not all that bad (subjective). It all depends really. The recommendation is if you have material you want to distribute on the Web or watch primarily on your PC monitor then your best bet is to either deinterlace (60i) or remove pulldown (24fps in 60i wrapper). If you are mostly just making DVD's or viewing your material on the tele then you don't have to worry about touching it at all (the footage will automatically be dienterlaced and you will not notice any extra frames).

There are many folks who opt not to remove pulldown..our very own Moderator Tacky is one...it's not a "must." But for folks like me who suffer from Delusions of Grandeur hoping one day to get his material on the "Big Screen" then I absolutely "have" to remove pulldown

Edit: Butterflies...my suggestion to you ...since you don't want to go through the hassle of setting up the free software to remove pulldown, is to just shoot 60i and deinterlace in post. In your situation, given your subject matter (filming butterflies) your best to shoot in 60i anyways (I don't think you will find a lot of people disagreeing with that statement). As I mentioned, you can always deinterlace to 24p or 30p in post. The 60i would be best also for slowmotion effects....plus it's a higher resolution (I believe) than 24p. I would not leave 60i if I were you....just my 2 pennies.

[lordtangent]

If you are mostly just making DVD's or viewing your material on the tele then you don't have to worry about touching it at all (the footage will automatically be dienterlaced and you will not notice any extra frames).
...
shoot in 60i anyways (I don't think you will find a lot of people disagreeing with that statement). As I mentioned, you can always deinterlace to 24p or 30p in post.

I just want to correct you on a couple of minor technical things here:

1. the tele doesn't deinterlace on display... what it actually does is display interlace natively. (A seemingly minor detail.... But it's an important distinction.) This is why the 24p stuff has 3:2 pulldown in teh first place. To put it into a compatible format. (For regular 60i NTSC, or 1080/60i HD systerms)

2. When you deinterlace 60i to 24p, you get "judder" in the final output since the timebase is not really the same between the two. (The same is true for when you wrap 24p in 60i with 3:2 pull down) If you want the best results with 24fps, it's best to shoot in 24p.

[butterflies]

It's not all that bad (subjective). It all depends really. The recommendation is if you have material you want to distribute on the Web or watch primarily on your PC monitor then your best bet is to either deinterlace (60i) or remove pulldown (24fps in 60i wrapper). If you are mostly just making DVD's or viewing your material on the tele then you don't have to worry about touching it at all (the footage will automatically be dienterlaced and you will not notice any extra frames).

In another thread (can't detect it anymore) somebody asked for help finding the diffferences in 24p and 60i in material that canon shows on their side. He was't able to see any significant diffrence on his pc monitor. The answer was that he should watch on a HDTele, because the PC monitor would not show any difference. How does that relate to your statement?

[butterflies]

To 24P or 60i, that is the question

This is the thread I was referring to!

[Ian-T]

I just want to correct you on a couple of minor technical things here:

1. the tele doesn't deinterlace on display... what it actually does is display interlace natively. (A seemingly minor detail.... But it's an important distinction.) This is why the 24p stuff has 3:2 pulldown in teh first place. To put it into a compatible format. (For regular 60i NTSC, or 1080/60i HD systerms)

2. When you deinterlace 60i to 24p, you get "judder" in the final output since the timebase is not really the same between the two. (The same is true for when you wrap 24p in 60i with 3:2 pull down) If you want the best results with 24fps, it's best to shoot in 24p.

Sorry...I did leave that statement kind of open...but when i mentioned automatically deinterlaced I should have made mention that most modern DVD players are progressive scan. It's not the TV that "automatically deinterlaces" it but its the player itself. You are right about the NTSC standard and compatability....

Yeah...I only mentioned to Butterflies about to shoot 60i because he made mention of not wanting to go through the hassle of removing pulldown. But in his case he is shooting wildlife...insects...which would potentially have a lot of slow motion footage in the final product. So the best way to shoot slow motion footage would be to film in 60i in the first place. Also, its true...if you want the best 24p it's best to shoot in 24p...but in his case it will be sort of a catch 22.

[Ian-T]

To 24P or 60i, that is the question

This is the thread I was referring to!

Yeah right....my opinion....for more narrative work 24p....for more documentary, wildlife (discovery channel)style work..60i.

The differences on your computer monitor might not be apparent. For example....it depends on the NlE, or software program you are viewing you material in. VLC is a program a lot of us use...If you have that program you can have it automatically deinterlace your footage...which means every time you view something with pulldown (or interlaced..60i)....the footage will look progressive every time (no jaggies etc.) Windows Media Player and other software does the same thing.

The problem with this setup is. if you distribute the footage on the Web for others to watch and someone opens up your material in another program without these settings on then the difference might jump out at them displaying jaggies everywhere. Ive seen this happen a lot where the individual who received the footage would ask the originater 'what's wrong with your movie...I see motion artifacts everywhere"...only to get a response from the originator "I don't know what you are talking about....it looks good on my monitor."

The above relates to the person you mentioned watching it on a PC monitor as opposed to an HDTV screen.

Edit: I think he might have simlar issues on an HDtele. As I mentioned in an above post...most modern DVD players are progressive scan capable...and when you burn your footage onto a DVD it will always incoporate pulldown to the footage (making it interlaced and adhering to NTSC standards). But...since the DVD player is progressive scan....it will display the image progressively on the HDtele no matter what. This is why I mentioned that if you are going straight to DVD with your work then there is really no need to remove pulldown or deinterlace your footage.

By the way....they need to do away with interlaced cams....there's really no need for them at all.

[Frank]

If it is so easy with DVFilm Maker then why is there this complex method everything is talking about: http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2007/0...-24p-pulldown/

I see your other questions have been answered so I'll just tackle this one:

DVFilm Maker costs about $150; the complex method is free.
DVFilm Maker has some restrictions (some unsupported codecs, no audio in certain cases).

In my case, I already had DVFilm from my DV days, so the cost was $0.
Also, I have been going uncompressed for my initial processing so the codec issue doesn't bother me.
Finally, I tend to handle audio separately anyway.

If DVFilm Maker works for you, it is extremely simple to use, and, to correct another post, it DOES remove pulldown correctly to give you true 24p.

[2Bdecided]

CRTs don't deinterlace - they display the interlaced signal "as is".

LCDs and plasmas deinterlace. Some do it well, some do it poorly.

There's no way of burning 60p or 50p content onto DVD, so you're "stuck" with 60i or 50i for SD. 720p50 and 720p60 are common, but 1080p50 and 1080p60 are not.

The reason someone couldn't see the different on their PC monitor was either because their eyes didn't care, or their PC couldn't display video properly. This isn't surprising - very few people understand the difficulty in displaying video correctly on a PC, and fewer still manage to do it properly. By default, windows will not lock the frame rate of the monitor to that of the video (result: duplicated or dropped frames = weird "pull-down" pattern), will not sync the frame refreshes even if the frame rate matches approximately (result = dropped frames), and will not change frames during the vertical refresh, but instead will change frames whenever it wants to (result = split frames).

If you live in a "PAL" country, it's great fun. (Hint: look for "50Hz" in the list of supported refresh rates for your monitor - chances are you won't find it! You'll be lucky to find 100Hz these days too).

Cheers,
David.

[2Bdecided]

By the way....they need to do away with interlaced cams....there's really no need for them at all.

It delivers a 30% bandwidth saving for comparable quality. 1080p50 would be twice the raw bandwidth of 1080i50, and wouldn't fit into HDV's MPEG-2 25Mbps without horrible artefacts. 720p50 does of course, and might even look better: but 720 is a smaller number than 1080, so is difficult for the marketing department to sell to Joe Sixpack.

Cheers,
David.

[Ian-T]

It delivers a 30% bandwidth saving for comparable quality. 1080p50 would be twice the raw bandwidth of 1080i50, and wouldn't fit into HDV's MPEG-2 25Mbps without horrible artefacts. 720p50 does of course, and might even look better: but 720 is a smaller number than 1080, so is difficult for the marketing department to sell to Joe Sixpack.

Cheers,
David.

Ok. When I made that statement I was really referring to 24/25 progressive frames as opposed to 60/50 progressive frames. But I see your point especially for tape based recording. If it were not for it being an NTSC standard then the 24p would not be encased in a 60i wrapper. I assume straight 1080 24/25p would be less bandwidth than 1080 60/50p? My thinking is, since there are hard disk cams in existence, HDV's 25Mbps can be increased even just a little (think JVC) creating a much less compressed output which means less artifacts.

By the way...I've noticed there are a lot of individuals in different forums who prefer a 720p cam over a 1080p. I think some mentioned the color information is better....not sure.

@Frank----I did not realize DVFilm Maker was able to remove the HV20's pulldown? I know it handles 24p natively like Vegas and other NLE's do but I thought there were issues with the HV20's missing flags (unless there was an update that I missed somewhere).

[2Bdecided]

I assume straight 1080 24/25p would be less bandwidth than 1080 60/50p?

Yes, proportionally so.

1080p25 wrapped in 1080i50 is the same bandwidth (bitrate for a given quality) as straight 1080p25. It's only you p24/i60 folks who have a problem. If it's hard telecined (i.e. the 3-2 exists in the video data itself, rather than as flags, which is the problem with the HV20 if I understand it correctly) then you're wasting a lot of bandwidth (or a little, if the encoder is very clever).

Cheers,
David.

[Frank]

@Frank----I did not realize DVFilm Maker was able to remove the HV20's pulldown? I know it handles 24p natively like Vegas and other NLE's do but I thought there were issues with the HV20's missing flags (unless there was an update that I missed somewhere).

It does a 2-pass pulldown removal where it detects cadence and removes 3:2 (or 2:3:3:2) pulldown correctly. This is as of version 2.4 (the latest).