|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
October 27th, 2007, 04:57 PM | #1 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: May 2007
Location: North Andover, Ma
Posts: 102
|
A1 30f is actually interlaced?
I normally do 60i, but recently did 30f a few times. But when I came to encode into DVD compatible mpeg2, I realized that A1 30f was actually interlaced, rather than real progressive. How I found it? When I encoded I thought I should use "no field", and "progressive" settings in the encoder, but it came out streaky. So took me quite a while before I tried the normal interlaced setting: lower field first, then it came out great.
so I realized why they call it 24f/30f instead of 24p/30p, because 24f/30f is still interlaced with 2 fields, the only difference is that 24/30f has 2 exactly the same fields, odd field and even field are the same frame. Obviously the exposure to the CCD happens only once, but that makes me wonder, why they didn't make it true progressive:no field....any reason behind this? |
October 27th, 2007, 06:00 PM | #2 |
Contributor
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 4,449
|
You must have captured it wrong. I shoot 24f, capture in FCP's 1080P24 HDV setting, edit in a 23.98 timeline, export, no interlace settings, and it will stay progressive all the way through. If you don't have your capture settings properly set, you can capture with pulldown and interlaced.
|
November 1st, 2007, 08:14 AM | #3 | |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York City
Posts: 77
|
Quote:
http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=84763 Capturing and editing 30f in Final Cut Pro is strange since it is done using the 1080i60 compressor and sequence, but for some reason the footage remains progressive. Hugh |
|
November 1st, 2007, 08:24 PM | #4 |
Major Player
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 949
|
You are mistaken.
|
November 2nd, 2007, 02:09 AM | #5 |
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Posts: 393
|
If both fields are the same then the image is progressive.
|
November 2nd, 2007, 05:40 AM | #6 |
Major Player
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Espoo Finland
Posts: 380
|
All TV video is recorded interlaced, with 2 fields, even if they are shot at the same moment, a.k.a. progressive. This is just the recording standard, has nothing to do with how the material was exposed. Actually there are programs which can use DV tape as a data recorder. Then you could say your Word documents are interlaced, if that made any difference.
|
November 2nd, 2007, 09:31 AM | #7 | |
Trustee
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Lipa City Batangas, Philippines
Posts: 1,110
|
Quote:
Some cameras might record this using pulldown to span the progressive frames across the fields of an interlaced format, but by no means does this apply to all cameras. For example, the XH-A1 stores and outputs 25P, not 25P over 50i, which is why in the early days of the A1, not all NLEs could handle its progressive output properly. Richard |
|
November 2nd, 2007, 11:33 AM | #8 |
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Posts: 393
|
|
November 2nd, 2007, 03:00 PM | #9 |
Major Player
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Espoo Finland
Posts: 380
|
The datasteam format is identical on 25p and 50i, there are two fields for each frame. The recording system does not know or care it the fields are exposed at the same moment or 1/50 seconds apart, they still follow one after another. 25p is not recorded as 25 separate complete pictures per second on tape, but as 2 fields. Of course the 25p is progressive, just the recording (data) format is identical with 50i.
We are talking about the simple and elegant PAL here, I do not want to know anything about pulldowns... |
November 2nd, 2007, 05:20 PM | #10 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Posts: 393
|
Quote:
I must confirm this now, the A1 does record the 25f as a progressive mpeg2-stream right? Atleast the 24f mode on the ntsc model does so. |
|
November 2nd, 2007, 06:23 PM | #11 | |
Trustee
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Lipa City Batangas, Philippines
Posts: 1,110
|
Quote:
In general Petri is sort of correct, but it aint necessarily so and the A1 is an example of that. Richard |
|
| ||||||
|
|