Source footage was shot with dslr, in 720p at 50 fps. Motion looks very fluid and smooth. If I convert to 720p at 25 fps, motion looks awful. The only solution I know is to add motion blur. Is there an avisynth filter that works on progressive footage, tracks motion of objects, process frames, and returns new frames with motion blur added ? QTGMC can do this ? Or QTGMC works only with interlaced footage, and 50p must be converted to 25i first ? Because, if something in 720p at 50 fps is uploaded on youtube, it will be converted to 720p at 25 fps, and motion will be awful.
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7
Last edited by codemaster; 7th Sep 2013 at 12:30.
Yes, QTGMC does that with progressive video.
But in my experience it often screws up -- some motion was blurred, some was not. Maybe I didn't use it right.
My experience is the same as jagabo's - It really depends on the content, but it often makes "mistakes" . ON some material it looks decent, others it looks perceptibly worse than not adding any blur
It's just impossible to add "perfect" motion blur in post because the calculated vectors are never perfect
The other avisynth filter you might try is mflowblur, but QTGMC is slightly better in most cases , and more configurable IMO
I noticed that recently, some video editors are starting to prefer to edit progressive footage at 50 or 60 fps, and give up on editing anything interlaced. Some are stating that "interlaced doesn't work", meaning that if you go from interlaced to progressive you loose resolution, add artifacts, etc. Some also say "progressive at 50-60 fps should be the standard". I hope Google will allow 60 fps in the future. They already allow 1080p, so maybe in the future, they will allow users to choose between 1080p at 30 fps maximum, and 720p at 60 fps maximum.
Last edited by codemaster; 7th Sep 2013 at 13:21.
Well everybody is hoping for improvements
But they already offer 4K , not just 1080p . But the problem is low bandwith provided, and poor flash playback experience
I think they need to go to HEVC or adobe flash needs to be completely revamped . VP9 looks fairly promising as well and is controlled by Google . But both VP9 and HEVC are far away from being currently "usable" due to CPU/GPU requirements , but that will change when the get more optimizations
I've used motion interpolation techniques to convert low fps video to very high fps video then blended frames together to simulate motion blur. With moderate motion it works pretty well. With very large/fast motion not so well.