Hi.

As I understand, if you play a DVD containing a 576i video, then either the TV or Blu-Ray Player will have to deinterlace it anyway?

Yes.

 If this is the case then is there any point in deinterlacing the footage in MEP before exporting and burning to disc?

No.

So, the answer to your third question is, Yes.

Hope my answers don't appear as rather brusque but I thought this would be the most direct way to answer your questions!

HTH
Jeff

Thank you for answering that for me. So if there isn't a need to deinterlace before-hand then why does the program offer that as an option in the export menu? And if I did let the program deinterlace then what would happen when it comes to playing it back on the TV and Blu-Ray Player?

So if there isn't a need to deinterlace before-hand then why does the program offer that as an option in the export menu? And if I did let the program deinterlace then what would happen when it comes to playing it back on the TV and Blu-Ray Player?

I honestly don't know, sorry.

Hi

. . . . if there isn't a need to deinterlace before-hand then why does the program offer that as an option in the export menu . . .

If you are referring to the De-interlace filter option, this is for still images it removes/filters out artefacts that can occur with some image when converting to a progressive scan video.

John EB

Hi

So if there isn't a need to deinterlace before-hand then why does the program offer that as an option in the export menu?

I don't think it does offer this option. It is actually called an Anti-Interlacing filter not a de-interlacing filter which is confusing and the help files describe it as an Anti-flicker filter also with the same description:

"Anti interl(f)ace filter: Choose this option for still pictures with detailed structures and high contrast. This filter reduces line flickering during TV playback."

It is there to overcome the aliasing or "twittering" of a high resolution object that occurs when being displayed on a lower resolution project or medium like a TV. I think it actually softens the image to prevent this somewhat.

And if I did let the program deinterlace then what would happen when it comes to playing it back on the TV and Blu-Ray Player?

You can de-interlace your export by choosing a "progressive" export option but you would likely find the result less smooth and whether it looked better would depend on how well MEP de-interlaces it compared to how well the TV or bluray player de-interlaces it. Most modern flat panel TV's have a lot of smarts built in and include smootheners in some modes which even add interpolated additional frames.

Interlacing was invented to trick the eye into thinking it was watching a higher smoother frame rate but this advantage has been lost with the passing of interlaced CRT displays as these days every display computer or TV must de-interlace to prevent the combing effect on rapid sideways movements.

Magix help describes interlacing rather well:

Interlace

Describes the creation of a full image from 2 half-images (fields).

In this process, even and odd lines are alternately assigned to one of the two fields.

The human eye perceives both of the projected half-images as a single full image, so that despite the slow image repetition rate (25 Hz for PAL, 29.97 for NTSC) a subjectively fluid image is seen.

I shoot 1080 progressive at 50fps so can not say how well MEP does with it's de-interlacing to progressive but best thing is to experiment and try exporting Interlaced and Progressive and playing back in your hardware environment.

Peter

Hi

@ Peter - thanks for correcting the filter name.

With interlaced video you are caught between a rock and a hard place.

Wikipedia has good description and examples of issues with de-interlacing here.

Interlaced video has 2 fields per frame (complete image) and comes in 2 forms Top Field First (TFF) or Bottom Field First (BFF).

The TFF video display the Odd lines first then the Even, BFF the other way round.

Converting from one to the other reverses the display order and can cause flickering/ jerkiness due to the later field being displayed first followed by the earlier field and should be avoided.

De-interlacing to make a progressive involve combining 2 fields to create a single image, however there is a discrete time interval in between the two fields and moving objects are in a different position in the next field the result of combining leads to combing.

For TV's it is best to leave the de-interlacing to the TV or player - the filters required to limit combing and other artefacts are far superior.

Computer monitors or digital projectors are not so good as TV's for filtering interleaved video, this is where you are caught between the rock and a hard place.

In some cases you are better to leave the video interlaced, in others de-interlacing to Progressive video is better and depends on the individual monitor or digital projector.

In this case you will need to experiment, however there may not be one ideal solution.

HTH

John EB

Thanks John, looks like we are on the same page with this!

Something seems to have gone wrong with the justification of the text on this forum as it is splitting up words in our above posts. Or is it my browser (FF)? How does it look at your end?

Hi

@ Peter - thanks for correcting the filter name.

With interlaced video you are caught between a rock and a hard place.

Wikipedia has good description and examples of issues with de-interlacing here.

Interlaced video has 2 fields per frame (complete image) and comes in 2 forms Top Field First (TFF) or Bottom Field First (BFF).

The TFF video display the Odd lines first then the Even, BFF the other way round.

Converting from one to the other reverses the display order and can cause flickering/ jerkiness due to the later field being displayed first followed by the earlier field and should be avoided.

De-interlacing to make a progressive involve combining 2 fields to create a single image, however there is a discrete time interval in between the two fields and moving objects are in a different position in the next field the result of combining leads to combing.

For TV's it is best to leave the de-interlacing to the TV or player - the filters required to limit combing and other artefacts are far superior.

Computer monitors or digital projectors are not so good as TV's for filtering interleaved video, this is where you are caught between the rock and a hard place.

In some cases you are better to leave the video interlaced, in others de-interlacing to Progressive video is better and depends on the individual monitor or digital projector.

In this case you will need to experiment, however there may not be one ideal solution.

HTH

John EB

Hi,

Well I contacted the brand of my TV and Blu-Ray Player and they have informed me that neither the TV or player do any deinterlacing. So if I play 576i content it will display it in 576i

Well it might show on on a flag on the screen that it is a 576i input format, but the flat panel in the TV can only create a picture progressively so it has to do this somewhere in the electronics. Because the interlaced signal has a 1/50 of a second time difference between one TV line and the next, the signal needs to be de-interlaced prior to display to avoid the combing artifacts we have referred to, anytime there is significant movement in a shot.

Peter,

Slightly OT but

Something seems to have gone wrong with the justification of the text on this forum as it is splitting up words in our above posts. Or is it my browser (FF)? How does it look at your end?

Indeed something has gone wrong. It seems to be in all browsers, I'm using Chrome. I have messaged Mathias.

Jeff

Thanks Jeff, looks like he has fixed it.

Hi

. . . . brand of my TV and Blu-Ray Player . . . .

What are the make and models?

As Scenestealer has said - flat panel TV's are progressive not interleaved, also if this is a Full HD or 4K TV then, depending on the quality of the upscaling, the issue is going to appear to be worse due to 576i being upscaled to 1080 or higher.

John EB

Hi

. . . . brand of my TV and Blu-Ray Player . . . .

What are the make and models?

As Scenestealer has said - flat panel TV's are progressive not interleaved, also if this is a Full HD or 4K TV then, depending on the quality of the upscaling, the issue is going to appear to be worse due to 576i being upscaled to 1080 or higher.

John EB

Here is what they said:

"In response to your query, please be advised that the television will be able to display the signal that it is receiving, but it will not upscale the resolution. 

If the resolution from the player is 576i then the television will display the picture with a resolution of 576i. Please note that neither the television, nor the player have the ability to modify the resolution from 576i to 576p".

Hi Jak

As John has requested - what are the make and models of your TV as they must be strange beasts, or very old.

If the TV is a 1920x1080 device ie Full HD and it did not upscale a 576 picture then you would see only a small rectangle in the middle of your screen.

See this page in Wikipedia, especially the section "Advantages" which reiterates some of our comments:-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_scan

An exert:-" It also offers clearer and faster results for scaling to higher resolutions than its equivalent interlaced video, such as upconverting 480p to display on a 1080p HDTV. HDTVs not based on CRT technology cannot natively display interlaced video, therefore interlaced video must be deinterlaced before it is scaled and displayed. Deinterlacing can result in noticeable visual artifacts and/or input lag between the video source and the display device."

I have a question regarding the deinterlacing option in the export settings menu of Movie Edit Pro 2015 Premium. I have some videos that were originally recorded in 576i and was wondering whether deinterlacing them would improve or degrade the picture quality when playing back on the TV.

As I understand, if you play a DVD containing a 576i video, then either the TV or Blu-Ray Player will have to deinterlace it anyway? If this is the case then is there any point in deinterlacing the footage in MEP before exporting and burning to disc? Or should I leave it interlaced and let the TV/Blu-Ray Player do the deinterlacing?

Thanks

Hello,

Could you take a look at this other message for me:

"in response to your enquiry, we want to inform you that even though the television has a 1366x768 resolution it is capable of displaying a lower resolution while it cannot display a higher one. 

Regarding the recorder, the unit does not have the capability to de-interlace the signal and does not have the functionality to upscale the signal. That it why it will send the same signal it receives. 

Also the television has the capability to decode a signal from an aerial connection but does not upscale or de-interlace a signal. 

The signal is send by the provider of the service, depending on how it was encoded it can be interlaced or progressive".

Can you or anyone else make some sense of this? It has left me quite confused.

Please help us so we can help you, by supplying the information we are requesting - What are the makes and model numbers of your TV and Player?

Please help us so we can help you, by supplying the information we are requesting - What are the makes and model numbers of your TV and Player?

Hi,

Sorry, I forgot to add that in to my last post.

The TV is a Panasonic TX-L19XM6B and the player is a Panasonic DMP-BD81

Thanks

Hi Jak

Thank you for that.

If you google the specs. and manuals there is nothing there that contradicts any of the things I have said and indeed information that contradicts the response from your supplier .They are perfectly normal devices using recent technology and as such should behave as we have discussed.

"in response to your enquiry, we want to inform you that even though the television has a 1366x768 resolution it is capable of displaying a lower resolution while it cannot display a higher one.

Agreed, the lower resolution material will be up scaled to fit the 1366x768pixels of the screen, and of course it can not do this to a higher resn. than the screen can display, and it will not be any more detailed than 720x576i. I think the confusion is due to the expressions we are using being used loosely - resolution and scaling mean slightly different things.

Regarding the recorder, the unit does not have the capability to de-interlace the signal and does not have the functionality to upscale the signal. That it why it will send the same signal it receives. 

Recorder? It is a player! Are they even aware of the model you are referring to? It may be that you particular player will not deinterlace 576i (although this is uncommon) - the Flat panel TV may need to do that, but there is plenty written in the player's manual about it's upscaling ability with 480p to HD.

Peter

Hi Jak

Thank you for that.

If you google the specs. and manuals there is nothing there that contradicts any of the things I have said and indeed information that contradicts the response from your supplier .They are perfectly normal devices using recent technology and as such should behave as we have discussed.

"in response to your enquiry, we want to inform you that even though the television has a 1366x768 resolution it is capable of displaying a lower resolution while it cannot display a higher one.

Agreed, the lower resolution material will be up scaled to fit the 1366x768pixels of the screen, and of course it can not do this to a higher resn. than the screen can display, and it will not be any more detailed than 720x576i. I think the confusion is due to the expressions we are using being used loosely - resolution and scaling mean slightly different things.

Regarding the recorder, the unit does not have the capability to de-interlace the signal and does not have the functionality to upscale the signal. That it why it will send the same signal it receives. 

Recorder? It is a player! Are they even aware of the model you are referring to? It may be that you particular player will not deinterlace 576i (although this is uncommon) - the Flat panel TV may need to do that, but there is plenty written in the player's manual about it's upscaling ability with 480p to HD.

Peter

Hello Peter,

thanks for your help on this so far.

Yeah, I can't think why he/she called it a recorder as I informed them it is a Blu-Ray Player and what model it is!

I did a little bit of experimenting with the deinterlacing thing. First I made a copy of a short interlaced video and deinterlaced it in MEP. Then I made another copy of the same video but left it interlaced. Comparing the two on my TV, I could see a noticeable difference. The one which I deinterlaced in MEP looked progressive if that makes sense. And the one which I left interlaced looked interlaced. So it appeared that the TV didn't deinterlace it and just displayed it as it was.

What do you make of that?

J

Hi

To be clear on the two videos you created for testing from the same clip.

. . . . First I made a copy of a short interlaced video and deinterlaced it in MEP. Then I made another copy of the same video but left it interlaced. . . . .

Did you create 2 discs or export to a video file format ?

I know this can be a pain, however we need a clear picture of what you did and saw for you to make the comment .

. . . . The one which I deinterlaced in MEP looked progressive if that makes sense . . . .

Can you explain in more detail the steps you took and what options you selected to create the 2 videos.

Please be clear and precise, so that we can get the whole picture of what you did to compare the 2 videos.

I want to avoid suggesting 'did you see this or that happen' and subconsciously influence what you actually did see and to take the guess work out of what you actually did to get the two videos.

Thanks

John EB

Thanks John, I would have asked the exact same.

Jak - what type of camera and format is the original video recording from?

Peter

Hi

To be clear on the two videos you created for testing from the same clip.

. . . . First I made a copy of a short interlaced video and deinterlaced it in MEP. Then I made another copy of the same video but left it interlaced. . . . .

Did you create 2 discs or export to a video file format ?

I know this can be a pain, however we need a clear picture of what you did and saw for you to make the comment .

. . . . The one which I deinterlaced in MEP looked progressive if that makes sense . . . .

Can you explain in more detail the steps you took and what options you selected to create the 2 videos.

Please be clear and precise, so that we can get the whole picture of what you did to compare the 2 videos.

I want to avoid suggesting 'did you see this or that happen' and subconsciously influence what you actually did see and to take the guess work out of what you actually did to get the two videos.

Thanks

John EB

 

Hi,

The two copies I made straight to a disc.

The first one I exported as progressive and the second one I left interlaced.

Thanks John, I would have asked the exact same.

Jak - what type of camera and format is the original video recording from?

Peter

Hi,

These videos were recorded quite a few years ago now with a Sony handycam camera, on to Mini DVD discs.