How many of you shoot interlaced? at DVinfo.net

Andrew Petrie · September 4th, 2003, 07:08 AM

Up until recently I was an avid Frame Mode operator... But with all of the recent talk about de-interlacing in post, etc, I'm going to experiment. Supposively you get more lines of resolution (with the XL1 anyway) using 60i. Merging both fields in post theoretically yields a better picture.

Does anyone shoot in 50/60i religiously, and rely on Post tweaking? Does anyone have real world experience where shooting interlaced proved better than progressive/frame?

Frank Ladner · September 4th, 2003, 10:23 AM

I would also like to hear some other opinions on this.

Generally, people say 'go with whatever works for you'. However, if higher resolution (or the illusion of) can be had by shooting interlaced and deinterlacing in post, then the only reason I can think why people wouldn't shoot that way is because of the time/tools needed in post.

Also, I have read that when converting to 24p using Twixtor or other interpolation plugins, it is best to use 60i as the source footage, instead of 30p. This makes since if the 60i would give sharp fields, but is the process of going from 60i to progressive doing basically the same thing frame mode does, only slower?
(as far as giving softness to the overall picture)

Currently, I have shot everything in frame mode on my GL2, but am very interested in what you guys have to say about 60i.

Thanks!

Robert Poulton · September 4th, 2003, 11:33 AM

Well I shot my first short film two weekends ago and it looks amazing. Very supprised.

XL1s was used with 60i and it was always underexposed and looked dark. So I exposed for highlights and then in post I was able to pull so much more out of the video. It was the right information that I got from here that helped. We were shooting inside for all the scenes and only one shot had all windows in the scene so we changed the angle and adjusted the camera. We rented a lightkit for $147 for two days and it had 1x350w 2x650w 1x1000w arri fresnel. For almost all the shots we used the lights accept for the long hallway that we had no way of lighting. Each night I logged all the video and with 60i I really didn't see any problems. I think the main reason I kept it 60i was so I could try to deinterlace the video different ways and see what would happen to it. I have shot some things in framemode but over all I don't mind interlaced because it will give me some options.

What I have heard about framemode is that it is still interlaced video but each field is capturing video at the same time. So it appears to be noninterlaced video.

Rob

Matt Stahley · September 4th, 2003, 02:11 PM

I shoot 60i but thats because thats the only format supported by the VX2k(except the 15fps progressive that i never use.) anyway i usually always field blend in FCP3 but this all depends on the project etc. I love the look of the field blend filter in Joes filters plug ins.

Frank Granovski · September 4th, 2003, 03:24 PM

I mostly shoot in fields. Because that's what looks best for most people viewing the footage on a TV. However, I use progressive for effect.

Matt Gettemeier · September 8th, 2003, 05:38 PM

When I used a trv17 and trv900 exclusively I had to shoot in 60i... it was then that I discovered a BARGAIN little program; Revision fx deinterlacer... it's around $89 online and can be downloaded in a couple minutes with dial-up or a couple seconds with broadband.

It looks GREAT on interlaced footage. You keep both fields and it blends them to one progressive scan. The way to do it is finish a project and then go back and apply the filter to all applicable clips... i.e. NOT titles and graphics.

It'll take the computer a little while to render, but it's not a rediculous amount of time. It depends on your machine.

After I got the dvx I thought I'd never use interlaced again, but a buddy of mine has an xl1s and it makes some UNBELIEVABLE images... some of his crap makes my mouth drop! Of course I still like my cam, but the results are still in the hands of the shooter.

Frank Granovski · September 8th, 2003, 06:06 PM

Andrew, shooting in progressive will yield a better result. Shooting in frame mode may or may not yield as good a result as de-interlacing.

Shawn Mielke · September 9th, 2003, 01:27 AM

I rather enjoy your wonderfully affectionate use of the word "crap", Matt. What do you think of shiznit, or dookie? Each emblazoned with it's own secret treasures, and that distinctly American sense of adventure. Mmmmm.....

September 4th, 2003, 07:08 AM	#1
Andrew Petrie Major Player Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: London, Ontario, Canada Posts: 484	How many of you shoot interlaced? Up until recently I was an avid Frame Mode operator... But with all of the recent talk about de-interlacing in post, etc, I'm going to experiment. Supposively you get more lines of resolution (with the XL1 anyway) using 60i. Merging both fields in post theoretically yields a better picture. Does anyone shoot in 50/60i religiously, and rely on Post tweaking? Does anyone have real world experience where shooting interlaced proved better than progressive/frame? __________________ Andrew \| Canon XL1s, ME66, Vinten Vision 3, GlideCam V16 (for sale!)

September 9th, 2003, 01:27 AM	#8
Shawn Mielke Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Santa Rosa, California Posts: 745	I rather enjoy your wonderfully affectionate use of the word "crap", Matt. What do you think of shiznit, or dookie? Each emblazoned with it's own secret treasures, and that distinctly American sense of adventure. Mmmmm..... __________________ Breakthrough In Grey Room

September 4th, 2003, 10:23 AM	#2
Frank Ladner Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Poplarville, MS Posts: 453	I would also like to hear some other opinions on this. Generally, people say 'go with whatever works for you'. However, if higher resolution (or the illusion of) can be had by shooting interlaced and deinterlacing in post, then the only reason I can think why people wouldn't shoot that way is because of the time/tools needed in post. Also, I have read that when converting to 24p using Twixtor or other interpolation plugins, it is best to use 60i as the source footage, instead of 30p. This makes since if the 60i would give sharp fields, but is the process of going from 60i to progressive doing basically the same thing frame mode does, only slower? (as far as giving softness to the overall picture) Currently, I have shot everything in frame mode on my GL2, but am very interested in what you guys have to say about 60i. Thanks!

September 4th, 2003, 11:33 AM	#3
Robert Poulton Major Player Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 245	Well I shot my first short film two weekends ago and it looks amazing. Very supprised. XL1s was used with 60i and it was always underexposed and looked dark. So I exposed for highlights and then in post I was able to pull so much more out of the video. It was the right information that I got from here that helped. We were shooting inside for all the scenes and only one shot had all windows in the scene so we changed the angle and adjusted the camera. We rented a lightkit for $147 for two days and it had 1x350w 2x650w 1x1000w arri fresnel. For almost all the shots we used the lights accept for the long hallway that we had no way of lighting. Each night I logged all the video and with 60i I really didn't see any problems. I think the main reason I kept it 60i was so I could try to deinterlace the video different ways and see what would happen to it. I have shot some things in framemode but over all I don't mind interlaced because it will give me some options. What I have heard about framemode is that it is still interlaced video but each field is capturing video at the same time. So it appears to be noninterlaced video. Rob

September 4th, 2003, 02:11 PM	#4
Matt Stahley Major Player Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Waynesboro, PA Posts: 648	I shoot 60i but thats because thats the only format supported by the VX2k(except the 15fps progressive that i never use.) anyway i usually always field blend in FCP3 but this all depends on the project etc. I love the look of the field blend filter in Joes filters plug ins.

September 4th, 2003, 03:24 PM	#5
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	I mostly shoot in fields. Because that's what looks best for most people viewing the footage on a TV. However, I use progressive for effect.

September 8th, 2003, 05:38 PM	#6
Matt Gettemeier Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: St. Louis, Missouri Posts: 936	When I used a trv17 and trv900 exclusively I had to shoot in 60i... it was then that I discovered a BARGAIN little program; Revision fx deinterlacer... it's around $89 online and can be downloaded in a couple minutes with dial-up or a couple seconds with broadband. It looks GREAT on interlaced footage. You keep both fields and it blends them to one progressive scan. The way to do it is finish a project and then go back and apply the filter to all applicable clips... i.e. NOT titles and graphics. It'll take the computer a little while to render, but it's not a rediculous amount of time. It depends on your machine. After I got the dvx I thought I'd never use interlaced again, but a buddy of mine has an xl1s and it makes some UNBELIEVABLE images... some of his crap makes my mouth drop! Of course I still like my cam, but the results are still in the hands of the shooter.

September 8th, 2003, 06:06 PM	#7
Frank Granovski Outer Circle Join Date: May 2002 Location: Hope, BC Posts: 7,524	Andrew, shooting in progressive will yield a better result. Shooting in frame mode may or may not yield as good a result as de-interlacing.