I know it's been discussed almost to death for Ppro 1.5.1 and how to get the best SD DVD image out of your Cineform 1080i projects and the AME bug reversing the fields but what is the official word on using PPro v2?

Does the bug still exist?

I've been doing a few tests...
1080i timeline exporting through AME lower field first, upper field first and then export SD movie and run that through the AME and all three seem to produce similar looking results when watched through Windows Media Player and the video overlay sent to my 'preview CRT TV'. The movement i quite jagged. Is this not a good route to preview?

I'm trying to avoid building an actual DVD disk to go and play it downstairs for each 10 second clip I'm trying.

So, what is the definitive statement on HDV 1080i to SD MPEG2 for DVD creation (PAL) for PPro2?

Alan, I just started experimenting as well, and I'm very disappointed that my beautiful HDV come out on DVD looking much fuzzier and far less sharp then my SD DV footage. I captured with Cinneform Aspect thru the Adobe plugin. Clips look great while editing with project set at 1080i/29.970. Then when I made a DVD it wrongly did bottom field first ( i knew sd dv was bottom, and I kinda thought I read hdv was top field first, but I wasn't sure-until I saw the results). Next I tried progressive - since at 1080i - even if it de-interlaced by skipping every other line, I'd still have enough res for 480/540 lines of DVD resolution. Well, I still get the jaggy stair steps-not quite as bad-but worse then with SD DV and agin terribly blurry-fuzzy picture. Colors look good though:). So is this the wrong work flow? does anyone have a link to Thread on the best setup for HDV to SD DVD? My camera was the Sony HC-1 and it was all shot at 60i, no Sony Cinframe. Thanks - PK

Please get Aspect HD 4.1.1 first, it is always best to keep current. If you are doing interlaced 1080 to interlaced 480 that can be tricker to do well, whereas progressive to progressive is the easiest. First thing is to verifiy that all you footage is encoded as interlaced and not progressive, use properties within Premiere -- the line that says YUV422 will say "progressive" if it is. If you file that are flagged as progressive (but or otherwise interlaced) there is a difference workaround for quality DVD outputs. Otherwsie the instructions here are still a good method http://www.cineform.com/products/FAQ.htm#Aspect8

Alan, I just started experimenting as well, and I'm very disappointed that my beautiful HDV come out on DVD looking much fuzzier and far less sharp then my SD DV footage. I captured with Cinneform Aspect thru the Adobe plugin. Clips look great while editing with project set at 1080i/29.970. Then when I made a DVD it wrongly did bottom field first ( i knew sd dv was bottom, and I kinda thought I read hdv was top field first, but I wasn't sure-until I saw the results). Next I tried progressive - since at 1080i - even if it de-interlaced by skipping every other line, I'd still have enough res for 480/540 lines of DVD resolution. Well, I still get the jaggy stair steps-not quite as bad-but worse then with SD DV and agin terribly blurry-fuzzy picture. Colors look good though:). So is this the wrong work flow? does anyone have a link to Thread on the best setup for HDV to SD DVD? My camera was the Sony HC-1 and it was all shot at 60i, no Sony Cinframe. Thanks - PK

I actually have always outputted my final film to SD DV before I convert to a DVD project. In otherwords, I do an intermediate render to the SD before converting it to DVD. Try that on a small scale first to see if you have a different story.

Chris, we recommend using CFHD for the same purpose. The problem using DV is it a 4:1:1 colorspace which clashes with the DVD 4:2:0, resulting in 4:1:0 effective color resolution. Your DVD of 720x480 will only have 180x240 worth of chroma vs the maximum 360x240 chroma signal. CineForm AVI are always 4:2:2, so they available this problem.

Please get Aspect HD 4.1.1 first, it is always best to keep current. If you are doing interlaced 1080 to interlaced 480 that can be tricker to do well, whereas progressive to progressive is the easiest. First thing is to verifiy that all you footage is encoded as interlaced and not progressive, use properties within Premiere -- the line that says YUV422 will say "progressive" if it is. If you file that are flagged as progressive (but or otherwise interlaced) there is a difference workaround for quality DVD outputs. Otherwsie the instructions here are still a good method http://www.cineform.com/products/FAQ.htm#Aspect8


David, Where in PPro 1.5.1 is the "properties" that you are referring to? If I click File and come down to properties, I don't get the options you refer to. I tried clicking else where, but never found the "YUV442."

As Always, thanks for your knowledgeable help!

Yes, I have downloaded the upgrade to 4.1.1, but I have not installed it yet-hopefully this weeken. The files I'm working (experimenting with) have already been converted with Aspect 4.0. I'm trying the procedure from the link that David left to the Cineform FAQ page at this time. Hopefully we'll all be getting BlueRay burners soon, and won't have to do this extra render (and will get our full HD glory!!)

I use both Premiere and Vegas, I assume the correct procecdure in Vegas to go from HDV to DVD would be similar with the after edit Cineform conversion to an AVI file before burning to DVD. Are there any special/unique steps when using Vegas that I should be aware of? (I did read the entire FAQ at Cineform - but I didn't see much about this with Vegas) Thanks - PK

Last evening (I'm a home users you see) I upgraded to the latest version 4.1.1.

The project I was using as my test case is a project that was editted using AspectHD v3.x using Premiere pro 1.5.1. I've now upgraded to Ppro v2 (Production Studio actually).

So the clips being used were captured using an older version of AspectHD. Will this make any difference to the standard export workflow or effect the final quality?

David, I'm familiar with the FAQ link you posted but thanks.

I was really wondering whether there is any news on the AME issue having actually been fixed in PPro2 or not or whether this 'workaround' is still actually needed.

Also, I wonder if my preview method (video overlay from Windows Media Player sent to CRT TV) is representative of what I'll see from my final DVD playing on a set top box.

I do believe the AME is a lot better, and it may do the trick for direct DVD encoding now. However, you do need to check the progressive vs interlace status of your clips, because that can mess things up.

Paul, the properties panel : right click on the clip and select "Properties".

I do believe the AME is a lot better, and it may do the trick for direct DVD encoding now. However, you do need to check the progressive vs interlace status of your clips, because that can mess things up.

Paul, the properties panel : right click on the clip and select "Properties".

I'm now confused. When I start a Aspect HD project (1440x1080, 60i) and capture using CineformHD capture with default settings, the resulting YUV422 line is flagged as "progressive". Did I capture correctly or not?

Also, are the instructions http://www.cineform.com/products/FAQ.htm#Aspect8
for the file as I've captured it or for when the YUV422 line is flagged as "interlaced".

I have had good success with the method on the cineform.com FAQ page until now. Previously all my video was captured in PP1.5 and then edited and exported (using the FAQ instructions) using PP2.0. Now that I am both capturing and editing in PP2.0, things don't work as well. The resulting 720x480 DV file (created using the FAQ instructions) is wavy -- not jumpy, as if the interlacing was wrong, but wavy. Is this related to the fact that my YUV422 line is flagged as "progressive"?

Patricia,

We asking poeple to look for the progressive flag as a preset in a pervious build set the default to progressive, even for some interlaced projects -- we didn't know if anyone in the field had experienced this. Fortunately there is a simple workaround -- we had even planned for this senerio 6 months ago when we added the Sony CineFrame support (we imagined cases where interlace and progressive processing could be mixed.) For all this there are registry control to override a progressively flags file. With Aspect HD 4.1.1 installed and Premiere NOT running, download (http://www.cineform.com/downloads/ForceInterlacedControl.zip) and run the ForceInterlaced.reg file. Now you export will be fine. If you ever do a progressive project you will want to try this control off (although the output will still be pretty good with it on.)

This is all about the process of scaling an HD to SD image. Progressive processing all the source scan line can be used -- beautiful oversampling -- whereas interlace source files require every second scanline to be used. Aspect HD realizes that progressive files can be used in interlaced progressive, so we use the best scaler for the source type -- for the highest quality.

Thanks, David. So if I'm understanding you, this will fix the export of my incorrectly flagged clip. Or do I need to recapture the clip for best results?

You don't need to recapture for the best results -- this little registry switch prevents that need.

I have to confess that I've got completely lost with this thread and need some help and guidance I think on solving this. I have faith that the help offered is corect but it's just gone a little over my head I'm afraid.

My problem is as folllows:

Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5.1, Aspect HD 3.x project using the Cineform 1080i preset (PAL).
Footage captured from my FX1E in HDlink using default settings (I think).
Project editted together and exported using themethod in the FAQ as supplied.
As it happens I've now upgraded to Productions studio so export is being performed in Premiere Pro 2 and AspectHD4.1.1.
The resulting AVI file is imported as an asset into Encore 2 and a DVD produced.
The image is all juddery. There's no 'combing' looking like an interlace problem. If I slow the DVD player down to fraction speed I get individual clear/clean images but playing at niormal speed the thing is all juddery and looks awful.
Previewing the expored AVI in Windows Media Player wiht teh video overlay sent to a local 4:3 CRT TV looks fine.

I thought I'd done things right but I must be missing something somewhere.

If I rightclick on my AVI asset in the Premier project and select Properties the only line that has the term 'YUV422' in it reads
"uncompressed video format is 8 bit YUV422".
so where will I find the YUV422 being flagged at progressive or otherwise?

And onto the "We asking poeple to look for the progressive flag as a preset in a pervious build set the default to progressive, even for some interlaced projects " statement. What does this mean? Where is this 'progressive flag'? Is this referring to the HDLink settings? How can I tell if my captures are de-interlaced or not or does this not matter to the problem.

And lastly, I've downloaded the registry updates but not understanding what they might achieve for me I've hesitated to load them as yet. Should I? Can you please understand the background behind them a little further.

As you can see, I'm curently a little out of depths with this thread and as I started it can I please ask if the explanation go back a little more towards first principals so I can leanr what this all means.

I hope this all makes sense cos I clearly need to getmy head around this.

regards

Alan

Alan,

"uncompressed video format is 8 bit YUV422" means interlaced.
"uncompressed video format is 8 bit YUV422 progressive" means progressive.

So your having a difference issue. That is why I asked if you saw "progressive" -- sorry I wasn't clearer on where to look.

So do you think you are seeing reversed fields, such that motion goes forward then backward for jumping forward again? Or are you seeing 30p, motion not as smooth as it should be because it is only updating a 30Hz rather than the expected 60Hz (for 60i). I may need to see a short sample.

David, the registry fix did solve the problem of wavy output when scaling from HD to SD. But it created another problem.

It seems I'm unable to play in the program monitor window. I can scrub, but the play button does nothing -- it just sits there. In fact I duplicated this problem on a second machine after installing AHD 4.1.1 and running ForceInterlaced.reg. (Both of these machines were able to play AVI files using WMP so I know it wasn't a monitor setting that had changed). I tried running the ForceInterlacedOff.reg and also having PP2.0 restart all plugins, but neither fixed the problem with playing in the timeline.

What did solve the problem was to uninstall AHD 4.1.1 and then reinstall. I didn't run either of the ForcedInterlaced scripts but now I can play from the timeline. Also SD output is not wavy so evidently the registry settings must have remained in place.

Just thought I'd pass this along in case anyone else had problems.

There isn't a relationship between the registry control and playback, so I have no clue what happened.

What about a relationship between registry control and the way AHD works (for me this just showed up in playback -- maybe other things were messed up too)? It seems like AHD got corrupted in some way and the reinstall fixed everything. Anyway, I'm happy now so the reason doesn't matter to me so much!

Alan,

"uncompressed video format is 8 bit YUV422" means interlaced.
"uncompressed video format is 8 bit YUV422 progressive" means progressive.

So your having a difference issue. That is why I asked if you saw "progressive" -- sorry I wasn't clearer on where to look.

So do you think you are seeing reversed fields, such that motion goes forward then backward for jumping forward again? Or are you seeing 30p, motion not as smooth as it should be because it is only updating a 30Hz rather than the expected 60Hz (for 60i). I may need to see a short sample.
David, thanks for the continued help. I've tried to determine the answer to your question but Ilm unsure how to determine the answer defintively. I'm assuming if the update frequency (50Hz in the UK) was too low then I would get a sort of stop motion effect rather than the jitter I see now. Not sure if it helps but to try and show you what I get. The following link is a frame grab of the DVD (taken from PowerDVD v5). There's a clear 'ghosting'. http://www.alandmills.co.uk/jittery_image.jpg (a little CSI spoof hence my kids lying on the floor with gunshot wounds!).

I thought I followed the FAQ closely but over the next day or so I willmake sure I re-export and re-build the DVD as per the FAQ tomake sure I did not mistakenly change the fiel order. Upper field first for PAL right?

That image has the field mixed to produce a 25P result, which is why it is not totally smooth. Now why this is happen I'm not sure. Can you do a frame grab from the CineForm AVI that you import into Encore to determine if that is interlaced?

That image has the field mixed to produce a 25P result, which is why it is not totally smooth. Now why this is happen I'm not sure. Can you do a frame grab from the CineForm AVI that you import into Encore to determine if that is interlaced?
I don't have this in front of me (at work) so will endevor to do this asap. However, the right click in Premiere on the imported asset gives me the "uncompressed video format is 8 bit YUV422" statement which, sort of, indicates that it is interlaced doesn't it?

Although I have to admit I've not noticed any 'combing' since capturing so I'm now wondering if I've simply had a mad moment and captured it with the wrong settings.

I don't have this in front of me (at work) so will endevor to do this asap. However, the right click in Premiere on the imported asset gives me the "uncompressed video format is 8 bit YUV422" statement which, sort of, indicates that it is interlaced doesn't it?

Although I have to admit I've not noticed any 'combing' since capturing so I'm now wondering if I've simply had a mad moment and captured it with the wrong settings.
Ok, I tried and failed here. I cannot capture a frame from within Media Player. Doesn't seem to work for video overlay. So I'll describe what I see.

When playing the captured file in Media Player a freeze frame has no comb like effect I normally see on intrelaced footage. I guess I would almost describe it as a motion blur of the movement taking place.

Viewing the souce when imported into Premiere2 it look sjust as it does in the screen shot I've already linked.

So what does this mean then? Does the fault lie in the capture? Is it correctable?

I need a screen grab. Download VirtualDub here : http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/virtualdub/VirtualDub-1.6.15.zip?download You can use this tool to extract a frame (or simply grab the screen and it will work.)

Hmm, what a difference to correct s/w makes. http://www.alandmills.co.uk/Source_image.jpg certainly looks like it's interlaced now.

Yes, this means your source is good. So now you need to work out where in the processing chain the fields get munged. Export this clip from Premiere as 720x480 16x9 (1.2 pixel aspect, bottom field first) and load that new SD clip in VirtualDub to confirm the interlacing is still there.

I do believe the AME is a lot better, and it may do the trick for direct DVD encoding now. However, you do need to check the progressive vs interlace status of your clips, because that can mess things up.

Paul, the properties panel : right click on the clip and select "Properties".

Thanks David, I have found it, but it just says Cineform Visually Perfect File detail: Contains 1 video and 1 audio track, Frame rate is 29.97fps and frame size is 720x480 and "Uncompressed Video Format is 8bit YUV422" NO mention of progressive or interlaced. This is of the file that I converted with CF to AVI. But now the AVI file - when viewed w Windows Media Player has LOTS of interlacing artifacts, So I have yet to make a DVD from it - (actually I tried but PPRO - after several hours was "unable, bit rate too high (8000-6000-4000). However in Sony DVD architect, I can make DVD's with even higher bit rates (9000-6000-4000).

What is AME - Adobe Media Encoder? Doesn't Adobe use the same Main Concept media encoder as Sony DVD Architect? Is AME better? If so, why can't I get it to encode at 9Mbps?

Thanks David!

Sorry - double post

when I play the original clips, as capture w Aspect, in WMP, there are no interlacing artifacts. 1440x1080 Uncompressed Video is 8bit YUV422. I tried downloading the ScreenGrab utility you refered Alan to, but Internet was busy 'unabe, try again'. Looking at his screen grab though, I would say that my clip (made to 720x480 avi per the Cineform FAQ) looks like Alan's "Sourceimage .jpg, NOT like his jittery image .jpg Properties still show Uncompressed Video is 8bit YUV422. Thanks - PK

I'm not going to make any suggestions until I see images, as "interlaced artifacts" are misunderstood by most people -- what some people call an error is correct interlacing. For normal tech support file a trouble ticket at www.cineform.com/support.

I have some captured frames, but I don't have a web page to post to, just e-mail. Is there an e-mail I can send them to you at? If not, I'll just do the CF ticket. Maybe they should look that way cause there being played progressive on the computer, but my sd DV footage never did!
Sorry to be such a neophyte, I just didn't expect it to be hard to downrez hdv to dvd - most posters seem to get great results starting out with such a higher res/color original. Thanks for al your time and effort - PK

I didn't believe it is hard to downres to DVD, as that is what most of our customers do (as I have done myself many times.) However there are steps where mistakes can be made in software or in user operation, we're just trying to determine in your case which it is. You can post a frame here as an attachment, otherwise use the ticket system (and they will ask for frames.)

Yes, this means your source is good. So now you need to work out where in the processing chain the fields get munged. Export this clip from Premiere as 720x480 16x9 (1.2 pixel aspect, bottom field first) and load that new SD clip in VirtualDub to confirm the interlacing is still there.
Done this export. But those settings aren't for me. This is a PAL project.
My settings I used are 720x576 upper field, which are the default as they appeared formy PAL project. You can see the settings here
http://www.alandmills.co.uk/PALsettings.jpg so I hope they are ok. Let me know if this is significant

This results in the following export. http://www.alandmills.co.uk/SD_Export.jpg which looks interlaced to me. Curiously the export I cut the current copy of the DVD from looks similar at http://www.alandmills.co.uk/SD_export_orig.jpg so I guess the issue is my settings in Encore v2?

Not sure if this might be important but a frame grab of a previously exported AVI that encodes and plays back fine on the same disk (it's a compilation)does not look interlaced at all. See it here at http://www.alandmills.co.uk/SD_Export_Works.jpg

The settings used in Encore v2 are as follows.
http://www.alandmills.co.uk/Encore_Settings.jpg which is just using one of the standard PAL presets.

Alan,

Are you expecting to see no interlacing at all? The PAL format is inherently interlaced so the down conversion actually looks pretty decent to me - though it's difficult to tell without seeing any motion. Interlacing might look naff on a PC monitor, but it creates far smoother motion on a TV.

With regards your SD export 'works' clip, is this actually from a similar 1080i source? It looks to me like interlacing has been foresaken for frame-blending - this might look decent enough on a PC monitor but it'll look poor compared to normal interlacing on a TV screen.

The initial issue you have might even be the deinterlacing technique PowerDVD uses rather than a problem with the clip itself per se.

Definitely appears to be happening in Encore DVD given those sources are correctly interlaced. In you DVD settings you have lower field first set (is that correct?)

Alan,

Are you expecting to see no interlacing at all? The PAL format is inherently interlaced so the down conversion actually looks pretty decent to me - though it's difficult to tell without seeing any motion. Interlacing might look naff on a PC monitor, but it creates far smoother motion on a TV.

With regards your SD export 'works' clip, is this actually from a similar 1080i source? It looks to me like interlacing has been foresaken for frame-blending - this might look decent enough on a PC monitor but it'll look poor compared to normal interlacing on a TV screen.

The initial issue you have might even be the deinterlacing technique PowerDVD uses rather than a problem with the clip itself per se.
Richard, thanks for the response.

TBH, I WAS expecting to see no interlacing and was surprised to see it because that would have, to me, explained the problem. The curious thing here is that the interlaced exports when transcoded in Encore using the settings shown plays poorly (all juddery) on a CRT TV and the example that does not look interlaced plays fine, which is the opposite to what I would have expected. I only use PowerDVD to take the screen shot I mentioned earlier.

This particular DVD project is an amalgamation of a handfull of little 'shorts' I've made over the last few years and it's quite possible that I've unwittingly used different export/encoding options on different projects. It is only my latest little project that does not play properly though and curiously this was editted earlier this year in PPro1.5.1 using AspectHD3.x. It was initially only going to be shown on the net but now I've upgraded to Ppro2 and AspectHD4 I'm trying to open the project to get an MPEG2 export out of it and am seeing these results.

Curiously though, this particular project does hang Ppro2 for a few minutes (turning the entire Widnow white while in the process) each time it is opened so I'm putting this one down to the foible of upgrading whilst in the middle of an ongoing project. So, although the project opens it's never felt 'cean' since I upgraded. Maybe I should create a new project in PPro2 and import the previous one. Maybe it'll clean things up a bit.

But either way, I guess we've shown, thanks to eveyone's advice here that the issue is not one of Cineform's or the PPro workflow.

I'll persevere and see if I can't get it sorted.

Alan, it looks to me like the field order is wrong if you are getting juddery playback from an interlaced source, so it seems to me that David's reply should sort the problem - you're exporting upper-field first from within Premiere, but you have the lower-field first in your Encore settings. Somewhere along the line the fields are therefore being played back in the wrong order.

You won't see a problem with your 'working' clip despite this clash because it is not interlaced.

All being well, just changing your Encore setting should fix it?