2hr Pal HDV timeline to SD DVD

[Matthew Cairns]

I know the process of achieiving a high quality SD DVD from HDV footage is an ongoing point of debate with many different ideas and suggestions. I have used Jeff Belunes suggestions in his HD to SD workflow and am encountering less than satisfactory results, perhaps because of the 2hr length of material.

I have a 2hr Hdv Pal CS3 timeline I want on a SD Pal DVD for replication (a documentary that has been screened in HD as Blu-ray) where 500 will initially be distributed.

I exported the 2hr timeline as 5 de-interlaced smaller files & sent them via VirtualDub (VirtualDub couldn't handle a single 2hr m2v file) to create avi files for Encore.

Encore transcodes the avi files.

For a singde layer SD DVD the quality is very poor on occasions where there is motion/ camera movement and I am assuming the variable compression is high when there is motion and thus the quality deteriorates.

To get the best quality image for content this long (ie 2hrs)
- would TMPGenc be an improvement over AviSynth/VirtualDub? No transcoding within Encore?
- would a dual layer master be an aim rather than a single layer master?

I have the resources (and wish) to upgrade to Master CS5.5 and wonder if I should re-export from CS3 to create files for importing into Encore CS5. Is there any improvement to the DVD creation process in Encore CS5 to CS3? Is the transcoding quality improved?
Or should I try to open the CS3 Premiere file in CS5.5 and export in 5.5 to Encore 5 to obtain high quality?
Or are third party software (VirtualDub/TMPGenc etc) still recommended to be used for a high quality HDV to SD DVD with CS5.5?

Any thoughts/ suggestions would be appreciated.

[Roger Averdahl]

Originally Posted by Matthew Cairns

I exported the 2hr timeline as 5 de-interlaced smaller files & sent them via VirtualDub (VirtualDub couldn't handle a single 2hr m2v file) to create avi files for Encore.

Don't deinterlace since you lose quality by doing that. If the source footage is interlaced, keep it interlaced when creating DVD's.

[Matthew Cairns]

Roger, I compared a SD DVD that had used the exported de-interlaced files with a SD DVD using interlaced exported files and the de-interlaced was notably improved.

Are you using CS5.5? If so have you experience with creating SD DVD's from HD footage?

Thanks

[Bart Walczak]

Matthew, there is a bug in Premiere that makes the direct encoding of mpeg SD files from any HD timeline a mess. My workaround is to export first to SD PAL uncompressed, either quicktime or avi, and then convert them to mpeg-2. Then you won't have to deinterlace, and the image quality will be much better.

If you look around this forum, it's an issue that has been tackled numerous times recently.

Note to moderators - perhaps we should make a sticky of one of these threads?

[Ann Bens]

Like Roger said do not de-interlace interlaced footage for DVD especially in CS3.
CS5.5 does a far better job but why should you de-interlace.
DVD players can handle interlaced footage just fine.
I have been working with HDV for years now and never de-interlaced.
Frameserving from CS3 to Tmpgenc is a very good option. Use to do that all the time and still do.

[Matthew Cairns]

I've de-interlaced as the image on the DVD looks much better than if left interlaced.

Perhaps there is a bug in the interlaced workflow? (fields being flipped?)

From Premiere (AME) I create an mpeg blu-ray m2v - then create an avi from VirtualDub - then the avi's are used in the transcoding within Encore.

Where could fields be flipped there?

[Peter Manojlovic]

Matthew...
Is the source HDV interlaced or progressive?

[Eric Olson]

Originally Posted by Matthew Cairns

I've de-interlaced as the image on the DVD looks much better than if left interlaced.

If there is not much motion and you shoot with a 1/60 or slower shutter, then interlaced HDV source will look better on a DVD after it has been deinterlaced. If there is lots of motion and you shoot with a 1/120 or faster shutter, than an interlaced DVD will look better. In either case, quality can be significantly improved by using a high-quality external scaler and encoder to master the DVD instead of relying on Premier and Encore to do everything.

[Matthew Cairns]

Peter - the source is HDV interlaced

Eric - what high-quality external scaler and encoder options are there?

Thanks

[Eric Olson]

Originally Posted by Matthew Cairns

Eric - what high-quality external scaler and encoder options are there?

An inexpensive option is to use Dan Isaacs hd2sd AviSynth script and HC Encoder as described in

HD to SD DVD – Best Methods | Creating Motion Graphics Blog | Blu-Ray DVD Authoring Menu | Precomposed

The main difficulty when down sampling HD to SD is to avoid aliasing artifacts which lower the quality of the resulting DVD. Even when there are no objectionable artifacts, a low-quality down sampling algorithm will reduce the apparent resolution. Aliasing can also reduce the efficiency of subsequent video encoding.

To show how much difference there is between scaling algorithms, a sinusoidal test pattern is used to compare the the aliasing properties of different scaling algorithms in

Down sampling methods

see also

http://www.mir.com/DMG/Software/freq-frame-table.html

It would be interesting to use these test this patterns to compare various HD to SD work flows.

[Peter Manojlovic]

Eric hit it on the head....

The only way to do proper downconverts is with third party softwares (AVISynth)
Adobe needs to step up to the plate and take this issue more seriously..
Until there's a plugin to properly address field manipulation, deinterlacing, resizing and reweaving, nothing will come of Adobe's claim to "Better quality" downconverts.

Heck, i can live with some artifacting that Eric mentions, but Adobe hasn't addressed the issue of properly dealing with interlaced sources.
How does your deinterlaced Vdub transcodes look?

Here's an old drawing i made, just to verify one of the scripts i used years ago, to better understand how resizing interlaced materials work.

[Bart Walczak]

I might be missing something, but in my experience the problem is limited to simultaneous downscaling and field switching in interlaced material (like from HDV to DV or MPEG-2). Progressive material does not seem to be affected. It is a major timewaster for many people (myself included), but let's not overstate the issue.

[Donald McPherson]

Don't know if this would work.
Save to hard disk the use DV Shrink to shrink it onto DVD

Download DVD Shrink v3.2.0.15 (freeware) - AfterDawn: Software downloads

[Peter Manojlovic]

Originally Posted by Bart Walczak

I might be missing something, but in my experience the problem is limited to simultaneous downscaling and field switching in interlaced material (like from HDV to DV or MPEG-2). Progressive material does not seem to be affected. It is a major timewaster for many people (myself included), but let's not overstate the issue.

Sorry Bart, perhaps i'm not understanding better....
But to properly do a downconvert of interlaced material, you need to separate the fields, resize, and properly weave them back.
I used to run these programs, and it took forever..Just think of the processing power involved. Also, think of all the different deinterlacers, options, and parameters in each deinterlacer, and we can come to the conclusion that Adobe hasn't taken the issue seriously...

Resizing interlaced frames any other way is wrong.
Of course, progressive is a different story. It's a non-issue. Whether somebody chooses bilinear, bicubic, or bicuspid, is all personal preference.

But nonetheless, interlaced downrezzing and progressive downrezzing are different animals..
That's why i always film in 30P.
AME correctly scales and crops progressive material..

[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

Originally Posted by Matthew Cairns

I know the process of achieiving a high quality SD DVD from HDV footage is an ongoing point of debate with many different ideas and suggestions.

That was three years ago, I'm afraid.

I have a 2hr Hdv Pal CS3 timeline I want on a SD Pal DVD for replication (a documentary that has been screened in HD as Blu-ray) where 500 will initially be distributed.

I exported the 2hr timeline as 5 de-interlaced smaller files & sent them via VirtualDub (VirtualDub couldn't handle a single 2hr m2v file) to create avi files for Encore.

Encore transcodes the avi files.
...
To get the best quality image for content this long (ie 2hrs)
- would TMPGenc be an improvement over AviSynth/VirtualDub? No transcoding within Encore?
- would a dual layer master be an aim rather than a single layer master?

... and wonder if I should re-export from CS3 to create files for importing into Encore CS5.

First things first, you don't need to upgrade to CS5. CS3 handles HDV to SD brilliantly on its own. I've had the exact same workflow for my feature with spectacular results.

Once you've locked your edit:
Export your movie as an uncompressed image sequence (I used TIFF 16-bit from AE, since I had finished in AE). I strongly recommend using AE to render your project as opposed to Premiere Pro. Deinterlace footage unless your material is true progressive (unlikely). If you need to, sharpen your footage before exporting.

Open a new project in Premiere and import your image sequence and export to Encore. Use CBR with a value of 6.5Mbps (should be just about right in terms of size on a single layer DVD). One uses VBR to save space, especially when you have lots of additional video tracks, soundtracks, etc. For best quality, use CBR.

Premiere will create an m2v file on your system and this is loaded into Encore. It is critical that you do your bit calculations prior to exporting from Premiere. To learn how, read the Encore manual. It's pretty straightforward. If you do this right, Encore will not re-encode the footage, but if you have made an error, Encore will re-encode to 'correct' the error. You need to avoid that at all costs.

This workflow provides excellent results. You DON'T need any other software. Hope this helps.