De-interlace... not necessary? at DVinfo.net

Aric Mannion · October 23rd, 2009, 10:05 AM

I've always brought video into after effects to de-interlace, cause I thought the de-interlace filter in Final Cut looked pretty bad. I was just looking at HDV footage in Final Cut that I needed to export for a SD DVD. I went into the sequence settings and changed it to fields: none (from upper) and it instantly de-interlaced. I'm not sure why I never noticed this before. So is there a catch I should know about or did I just de-interlace my edit?

Geoffrey Cox · October 23rd, 2009, 02:04 PM

Aric - I don't know but have also wanted to know the exact same thing! My guess is that it just plays a single field (thus reducing the resolution). In QT you can do a similar thing by selecting single field in A/V settings. I'm certain though that selecting no field dominance in FCP does not actually de-interlace the image.

October 23rd, 2009, 10:05 AM	#1
Aric Mannion Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Boston, Massachusetts Posts: 616	De-interlace... not necessary? I've always brought video into after effects to de-interlace, cause I thought the de-interlace filter in Final Cut looked pretty bad. I was just looking at HDV footage in Final Cut that I needed to export for a SD DVD. I went into the sequence settings and changed it to fields: none (from upper) and it instantly de-interlaced. I'm not sure why I never noticed this before. So is there a catch I should know about or did I just de-interlace my edit?

October 23rd, 2009, 02:04 PM	#2
Geoffrey Cox Major Player Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Huddersfield, UK Posts: 469	Aric - I don't know but have also wanted to know the exact same thing! My guess is that it just plays a single field (thus reducing the resolution). In QT you can do a similar thing by selecting single field in A/V settings. I'm certain though that selecting no field dominance in FCP does not actually de-interlace the image.