Believe it or not I have mostly only shot indoor stage lit footage with the EX1 in the year or so that I have owned it. Now I have a job to shoot scenery (with people in the footage).

Since that appears to be the most prevalent EX footage on Vimeo, I though that many of you probably shoot a lot of that and was wondering what you would recommend in terms of mode.

End product will be an HD DVD and some SD DVDs.

My thought was HQ 1080i/60 to avoid the motion artifacts. Or do you think I should shoot progressive and limit the motion? Any other settings I should consider for best results?

I edit with Sony Vegas.

Thanks for the input.

John

You might want to check out some of the filters that are available. I like the Tiffen filters. They have a wide variety, depending on the effect you are looking for:
Filter Page (http://www.tiffen.com/filters.htm)

<snip>
End product will be an HD DVD and some SD DVDs. <snip>
John


I'm assuming meant to say "End product will be an BluRay..." ?

I'm assuming meant to say "End product will be an BluRay..." ?

No, he wants an HD DVD and an SD DVD. That part's easy.

But does anyone have any input for the questions I asked??

I will be shooting starting tomorrow.

Thanks,

John

Well,

Since no one has offered an opinion, I think that maybe I will shoot scenery and people involving panning at HQ 1080i/60 and also try some non-motion scenery shooting using Progressive. Then compare the two. I can always deinterlace or interlace later when I edit and render. My guess is that both will look the same anyway. No one method clearly better looking than the other.

I'll post my results. Perhaps it can help someone else at a future date.

John

John,

I never shoot interlaced because I don't like the way it looks. I shoot 1080/30P 99% of the time and I have not changed my way of shooting one bit from the old days of Betacam and other 60i formats. I've never seen motion artifacts with the EX footage. If motion was a problem, you'd see it in the air show fotoage I posted on Vimeo a few weeks ago.

I think you're anticpating a problem that does not exist. Maybe that's why there haven't been too many people stepping forward with tips. There really aren't any tips to share. Just keep doing whatever you've been doing.

De-Interlaced 60i footage will look slightly soft compared to 30P footage as the spacial resolution of 60i is lower than 30P, plus de-interlacing will tend to soften it a little more especially if there is lots of motion.

De-Interlaced 60i footage will look slightly soft compared to 30P footage as the spacial resolution of 60i is lower than 30P, plus de-interlacing will tend to soften it a little more especially if there is lots of motion.

Thanks Alister,

Maybe then I will shoot 1080/30p and watch the motion.

Much appreciated.

John

It's not a huge difference, but it is there. I shoot all of my own material progressive, it's so much easier to handle in post. Given that just about every new monitor or TV sold for the last 2 years has been a progressive device I really cant see the point in shooting interlace any more.

It seems daft to produce an interlace DVD only for it to then be shown on an LCD or Plasma TV that bob de-interlaces the signal or de-interlaces it in some other way in order to display it. Even then you often end up with interlace artifacts.

Alister, I couldn't agree more. Interlaced is out.

It's not a huge difference, but it is there. I shoot all of my own material progressive, it's so much easier to handle in post. Given that just about every new monitor or TV sold for the last 2 years has been a progressive device I really cant see the point in shooting interlace any more.

It seems daft to produce an interlace DVD only for it to then be shown on an LCD or Plasma TV that bob de-interlaces the signal or de-interlaces it in some other way in order to display it. Even then you often end up with interlace artifacts.

I would have no reservation whatsoever towards the above statement, Alister - were it not for one little thing:

- apart from 24p (and all framerates of 720p), only interlaced streams are accepted by both DVD and BD specification.

Having said that, I shoot 100% progressive, as well. But I can't help feeling a little uneasy when rendering out my video streams from Vegas for DVD Architect to use in my DVD's or BD's... I'm assuming what I get when rendering 1080/25p into 1080/50i is really 25PsF, and no true interlacing (in terms of field time offset) takes place - but I have witnessed the dreadful combing in motion once or twice in such DVD/BD compliant streams!

I shoot 100% progressive because I produce documentary DVDs that people will play in their homes on 1080p blu ray players and 1080p Hi Def televisions.

I understand the primary reason for shooting 1080i is because that's the signal you'll get through your cable. (yes i is supposedly good for fast motion as well)

I would have no reservation whatsoever towards the above statement, Alister - were it not for one little thing:

- apart from 24p (and all framerates of 720p), only interlaced streams are accepted by both DVD and BD specification.

Having said that, I shoot 100% progressive, as well. But I can't help feeling a little uneasy when rendering out my video streams from Vegas for DVD Architect to use in my DVD's or BD's... I'm assuming what I get when rendering 1080/25p into 1080/50i is really 25PsF, and no true interlacing (in terms of field time offset) takes place - but I have witnessed the dreadful combing in motion once or twice in such DVD/BD compliant streams!

Piotr,

Do you find that Vegas gets the field order wrong sometimes when it renders? Some have alluded to this on the Vegas forums.

John

I shoot 100% progressive because I produce documentary DVDs that people will play in their homes on 1080p blu ray players and 1080p Hi Def televisions.

I understand the primary reason for shooting 1080i is because that's the signal you'll get through your cable. (yes i is supposedly good for fast motion as well)

It also handles low light the best because it has two fields.

John

Piotr,

Do you find that Vegas gets the field order wrong sometimes when it renders? Some have alluded to this on the Vegas forums.

John

John,

I guess what Vegas might be getting wrong is not so much field order (for true PsF this should not matter), but the field dominance.

60i vs 30p, Gee...it reminds me a little of Mac vs PC.
I've gone back and forth for several years and, for HD, finally have settled on:
1) shoot 60i
2) edit 60i HD DI
3) for BD the edit goes straight to 1080 60i BR and looks perfect
4) for DVD I rescale (careful here, not all rescalers are equal) the HD DI to either 480 60i or 30p .avi (usually stay 60i), transcode the SD.avi to m2v. On an HDMI DVD player to HDTV, the images are sharp and free of artifact.
Clearly the 30p experts have have perfected their process and get great results (Doug Jensen's DVDs certainly set a high standard), but it seems like there are also 60i workflows that work well, at least for BD & DVD.
I'm satisfied for the moment, and there is a lot to be said for having a workflow established that you feel confident about (no matter 60i or 30p). Allows me to pay more attention to the project rather than the process.
That said, who knows what I'll be doing next year.

John,

I never shoot interlaced because I don't like the way it looks. I shoot 1080/30P 99% of the time and I have not changed my way of shooting one bit from the old days of Betacam and other 60i formats. I've never seen motion artifacts with the EX footage. If motion was a problem, you'd see it in the air show fotoage I posted on Vimeo a few weeks ago.

I think you're anticpating a problem that does not exist. Maybe that's why there haven't been too many people stepping forward with tips. There really aren't any tips to share. Just keep doing whatever you've been doing.

Thanks Doug,

Much appreciated. I did end up shooting progressive and it looks very good. And your air show footage looks great.
http://www.vimeo.com/5425091

John

I'm a 1080/60i guy. Sorry...30p just looks jerky/blurry to me. That plus I've heard it is the worst format for cross-conversions between PAL and 24p...something to do with pulldown. I guess since I shoot a lot of hand-held stuff and HATE all the reality shows that are shot 24p because it's nothing but BLUR BLUR...man it makes me dizzy sometimes watching it.

I do prefer the look of native 60p on an LCD TV but I have reservations about the resolution. Depending on the TV de-interlaced 60i footage doesn't look so bad. Give me a 1080/60p option and I will shoot that format...interlacing for standard def delivery.

By the way, a good study on the issue of HDTV's deinterlacing engines: http://www.hometheatermag.com/hookmeup/1107hook2/index.html and http://hometheatermag.com/hookmeup/308testing/ . Basically the crappier TVs de-interlace to 540p and upconvert to 1080p or 720p (depending on your TV). The better engines will only de-interlace motion artifacts, retaining the native information available and giving a much better picture overall. Your transcoding software, if it's good, has this in it sometimes referred to as "motion adaptive de-interlacing" or something similar. Doing this in real-time is the kicker though. So it's not the format (60i) that looks bad, it's the way older HDTVs handle signals. The newer the TV, the more likely your 60i footage will look good.

I'm a 1080/60i guy. Sorry...30p just looks jerky/blurry to me. That plus I've heard it is the worst format for cross-conversions between PAL and 24p...something to do with pulldown. I guess since I shoot a lot of hand-held stuff and HATE all the reality shows that are shot 24p because it's nothing but BLUR BLUR...man it makes me dizzy sometimes watching it.

I do prefer the look of native 60p on an LCD TV but I have reservations about the resolution. Depending on the TV de-interlaced 60i footage doesn't look so bad. Give me a 1080/60p option and I will shoot that format...interlacing for standard def delivery.

By the way, a good study on the issue of HDTV's deinterlacing engines: Home Theater: Are You Getting All of the HDTV Resolution You Expected? Round 3 (http://www.hometheatermag.com/hookmeup/1107hook2/index.html) and Home Theater: Testing HDTVs part 2 (http://hometheatermag.com/hookmeup/308testing/) . Basically the crappier TVs de-interlace to 540p and upconvert to 1080p or 720p (depending on your TV). The better engines will only de-interlace motion artifacts, retaining the native information available and giving a much better picture overall. Your transcoding software, if it's good, has this in it sometimes referred to as "motion adaptive de-interlacing" or something similar. Doing this in real-time is the kicker though. So it's not the format (60i) that looks bad, it's the way older HDTVs handle signals. The newer the TV, the more likely your 60i footage will look good.

Which transcoding software are you using Adam?

John

Which transcoding software are you using Adam?

John

Canopus Procoder 3

Canopus Procoder 3


That's the one I use. It is very good.

John