VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2
1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 50
Thread
  1. Member
    Join Date: Jan 2014
    Location: UK
    Search Comp PM
    Hi, I'm fairly new to video (& I'm trying to make a home movie).

    I have 2 sets of clips that i want to fit into my movie (a Skydrive link for 2 small samples is at the end of this post).

    I'm trying to find out if my video clips are interlaced or progressive before setting project settings in Premiere Elements.

    I have 2 versions of MediaInfo on 2 Pc's and they both say the opposite to each other. Version 0.7.47 says they are progressive clips, and the latest version of MediaInfo 0.7.65 says interlaced.

    Could somebody be kind enough to offer some advice?

    Here's the link: https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=F587D73C02F4DBBB!2687&authkey=!APoUWb6pYJdVoyQ&i...=folder%2c.AVI

    Many thanks
    Quote Quote  
  2. Both clips are progressive.
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member
    Join Date: Mar 2008
    Location: United States
    Search Comp PM
    However, they are 30 frames per second, with a duplicate every 6 frames. How did that happen?
    Some strange setting during capture?

    Was this captured from tape?
    Quote Quote  
  4. Looks like a digital camera to me.
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member
    Join Date: Jan 2014
    Location: UK
    Search Comp PM
    Hi, and thanks for replies.
    No, not tape. They were all recorded on an old digital SD camcorder by Hitachi, onto memory card. They differ because I changed the settings in cam.
    Ps. It would be so good if you could tell me how you know they are progressive (or not), as I'd love to make sense of it myself too.
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member
    Join Date: Mar 2008
    Location: United States
    Search Comp PM
    If you look at it frame by frame (in Virtualdub, for example) you don't see any of the "combing" pattern you
    see with interlaced material. Regular interlaced footage is really two images (fields) in one frame
    separated temporally by either 1/60 second (NTSC)
    or 1/50 (PAL) - so anywhere there is movement this pattern can usually be seen, as each field is from a
    different moment in time.

    The odd lines contain one field, while the even lines contain the other.
    Quote Quote  
  7. Banned
    Join Date: Oct 2004
    Location: New York, US
    Search Comp PM
    A digital camera or phone-camera, maybe something like a GoPro??? Originally 960-pixel height. Ultimate use for these videos (DVD? AVCHD? BluRay? PC-only?) can't be determined from the videos AFAIK, but the format isn't compliant with any of those media except for PC-only or mini device display like an iPhone, etc. . Both vids have been through some level of processing. The smaller 77MB AVI at 640x480 (with Mummy) which has duplicate frame every 6 frame or so has some sort of "warping" and periodic blurring in the images that doesn't come from the nervous camera movements. Look at frames 1148 through 1165 for a clear example of these effects. In the bigger 720x480 video, each pair of duped frames has one frame blurred. Edited in a non-smart-rendering NLE like Premiere Elements, the vids will be re-encoded in their entirety and lose quality, and the color will be a mess. If re-encoded to something like DVD, no telling what they'll play like in a set top player. The audio as-is would be the wrong format and sampling rate for video disc formats.

    Just some quickie ramblings on some rather strange (to me) video clips.
    Last edited by sanlyn; 19th Mar 2014 at 09:31.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
    If the dupes were removed, your video would not play at the desired frame rate...
    I find it a little hard to believe the desired framerate is one with duplicates every 6 frames. If someone wants 30fps they use a camera that creates 30 unique frames every second, not one where 5 of them are duplicates. Or, if absolutely necessary (like for NTSC DVD), you don't duplicate frames but use a pulldown to insert duplicate fields during playback. The result is much smoother playing.
    Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
    ...and audio would be out of synch.
    If the dupe frames are removed the framerate goes back to 25fps, the length remains the same, and the audio remains in synch. Just like when you IVTC back from 29.97 to 23.976fps.
    Quote Quote  
  9. Banned
    Join Date: Oct 2004
    Location: New York, US
    Search Comp PM
    Yes, you're right. I tried it just this morning. Haven't checked audio yet. I was googling to get a handle on why the "original height" is listed as 960 pixels, but found conflicting info on that. The only thing I came up with was info on some camera types that shoot video as 1280x960, which is a 1.333:1 (i.e., 4:3) frame.
    Last edited by sanlyn; 19th Mar 2014 at 09:31.
    Quote Quote  
  10. Member
    Join Date: Jan 2014
    Location: UK
    Search Comp PM
    Just to complicate things. Different versions of MediaInfo gives different readings for properties inc original height, and scan type too. Older version says progressive and new one says interlaced with original height property too.
    So, is looking at the video frame by frame for combing the best way to tell. How clever
    Quote Quote  
  11. Member
    Join Date: Jan 2014
    Location: UK
    Search Comp PM
    I don't have the original camcorder now and can't remember the name or model, but looking through google images it looked something like this:

    Again, i can't remember the name or model, but i found this info for a possible match:
    HITACHI HSC-S2 ??????
    Specs:
    AVI (Image data: Motion JPEG, audio: ADPCM) Recorded Pixels 720 480 pixels (D1) / 640 480 pixels (VGA) /
    320 240 pixels (QVGA) Frame rate 30 frames /sec Still Recording file formats
    Quote Quote  
  12. Banned
    Join Date: Oct 2004
    Location: New York, US
    Search Comp PM
    Thanks for the camera info.

    Originally Posted by DJBoshh View Post
    Just to complicate things. Different versions of MediaInfo gives different readings for properties inc original height, and scan type too. Older version says progressive and new one says interlaced with original height property too.
    So, is looking at the video frame by frame for combing the best way to tell. How clever
    True, we have no perfect reporting utility, and even big names like Adobe and Sony can misinterpret. It isn't always the fault of the analyzer but often is the fault of the way the video source's header info was created.

    The other way yp analyze structure is to use Avisynth and the SeparateFields() function. If two consecutive fields show the same image during the slightest motion or change, it indicates progressive video. Two consecutive fields that show different instances in time (but not necessarily combing) indicates interlace or some form of it. Four fields playing the same thing as in your videos would indicate duplicate frames.

    Interlacing/telecine doesn't always appear as combing in every frame, nor will it appear as combing in deinterlacing media players, or is often so slight as to be unnoticeable. There are better ways to analyze common and oddball frame structures: http://neuron2.net/faq.html.
    Last edited by sanlyn; 19th Mar 2014 at 09:31. Reason: I promise, I don't make typos -- the characters move when no one's watching.
    Quote Quote  
  13. Member
    Join Date: Jan 2014
    Location: UK
    Search Comp PM
    Great advice from clever people. Thank you so much.

    Just to conclude then, i'm assuming the clips are progressive and i'm going to attempt to make a home movie with them in Premiere Elements with a project setting of 640x480 progressive 30fps

    My child when she grows up wont realize it in years to come when she watches the movie that you guys here helped it to be the best it could be
    Quote Quote  
  14. Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
    some sort of "warping" and periodic blurring in the images that doesn't come from the nervous camera movements.
    The warping is from a rolling shutter. The blurring from camera shake. The two together imply a digital optical image stabilizer has been used. Either by the camcorder or in post.
    Quote Quote  
  15. Banned
    Join Date: Oct 2004
    Location: New York, US
    Search Comp PM
    Using TFM+TDecimate on the "mummy" sample, frame rate works out to 24 FPS. Duplicate frames and much of the warping and some blurring seem to be eliminated. I resampled audio to a more compatible 48KHz PCM. There is still some motion jitter on playback. Applying pulldown might take care of that.

    So far, the format of the videos can be played only a PC. As for set top players, I don't think many players will accept these video and audio formats from the original on disc or flash drives. Other members might want to clarify this.

    How do you intend to archive and play these videos for future use?
    Last edited by sanlyn; 19th Mar 2014 at 09:31.
    Quote Quote  
  16. Member
    Join Date: Jan 2014
    Location: UK
    Search Comp PM
    hello mate
    I'm going to make a movie with them in premiere elements. That's why I needed to know if they were progressive or not, so I could set the project settings correctly.
    Strange thing was that 2 different versions of MediaInfo gave opposite results, 1 saying progressive and the other saying interlaced for the same clip.
    Last edited by DJBoshh; 8th Jan 2014 at 07:40.
    Quote Quote  
  17. Member
    Join Date: Jun 2012
    Location: USA
    Search Comp PM
    Your clips are progressive. But there's another issue. One clip is 720x480 with what appears to be square pixels and the other is 640x480, also appearing to have square pixels. (These are untouched originals, correct?)

    If it were me, I would set up a 720x480 square pixel progressive project and allow the thinnish black bars to appear at the sides in the 640 footage. This of course matches no broadcast standards, but will play fine on a computer or a media player. I would do it this way to cause the least damage to the footage by resizing or otherwise messing around.

    Please keep the raw footage someplace safe, because other, better options are sure to turn up in the future.
    Quote Quote  
  18. Banned
    Join Date: Oct 2004
    Location: New York, US
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by smrpix View Post
    Your clips are progressive. But there's another issue. One clip is 720x480 with what appears to be square pixels and the other is 640x480, also appearing to have square pixels. (These are untouched originals, correct?)

    If it were me, I would set up a 720x480 square pixel progressive project and allow the thinnish black bars to appear at the sides in the 640 footage. This of course matches no broadcast standards, but will play fine on a computer or a media player. I would do it this way to cause the least damage to the footage by resizing or otherwise messing around.

    Please keep the raw footage someplace safe, because other, better options are sure to turn up in the future.
    The difference in frame sizes and aspect ratios is a major problem. You can't use that mix in "a movie", whether the movie is a DVD, AVCHD, etc. Also, that doesn't solve the problem of bad motion with the duplicate frames; I'd have to stick with removing them and setting frame rate to 24FPS for all the videos that have that dupe frame problem. You could apply pulldown of some sort to bring it up to 30FPS -- but you still have the problem of the square-pixel 3:2 and 4:3 mix (which could be solved as suggested by making everything 720x480 with side borders added for the 4:3 clips so that all frames are the same and all display square-pixel aspect ratios look "alike" to players).

    True, that won't meet any of today's video standards for any media, whether it's DVD, BluRay, AVCHD, etc. Some encoders won't even let you do it. Meanwhile removing duplicate frames and getting smoother motion isn't something I'd try with Premiere Elements. As square-pixel mkv it might even play stored on a hard drive or flash drive with some BluRay players (it worked on my OPPO).

    The attached is an h264 mkv of the "mummy" AVI at 24FPS, dupes removed, levels fixed, audio resampled, and most of the MJPG grunge and fuzz removed. It is 720x480 that plays at 4:3 DAR. All processing in AVisynth, encoded with TMPGenc Mastering Works's x264. I used a bitrate at about 5000 to handle the jerky camera motion and reduce motion noise, as well as using Stab() to steady the frame just a bit, but a little more bitrate might help a bit more. The Mummy AVI changes brightness levels several times, which was another headache. Later I'll try to rework both vids at 720x480 square pixel, but the "Jersey" AVI has serious black level problems with crushed, dense, and grimy blacks -- I wouldn't try fixing that in Elements, either. You'll have to work in the original YUV colorspace to fix it.
    Last edited by sanlyn; 19th Mar 2014 at 09:32. Reason: Mummy mkv attachment replaced by new version in post #49
    Quote Quote  
  19. Banned
    Join Date: Oct 2004
    Location: New York, US
    Search Comp PM
    Having a problem with the "Jersey" AVI. Removing duplicate frames results in segments that look like missing frames. This is different than the 640x480 clip, which has jittery movement if dupe frames aren't removed. I'll have to play with the Mummy video again. Later.
    Last edited by sanlyn; 19th Mar 2014 at 09:32.
    Quote Quote  
  20. Member
    Join Date: Jun 2012
    Location: USA
    Search Comp PM
    Demuxing the file and playing in MPC-HC reveals that all frames are unique. The duplicates appear to be happening on playback.

    Importing the demuxed video and audio into Avid (IgnoreQTRate True) reveals that NONE of the standard frame rates are correct (match audio duration.)

    Name:  BINS.png
Views: 620
Size:  39.3 KB

    Here is a file exported from Premiere Pro (don't have elements) at 720x480 29.97p square pixels, no frame rate adjustments, no color adjustments:
    Attached Files
    Quote Quote  
  21. Banned
    Join Date: Oct 2004
    Location: New York, US
    Search Comp PM
    But playback of emilyjersey.mkv in MPC-BE, VLC, and VirtualDub has duplicate frames.
    Last edited by sanlyn; 19th Mar 2014 at 09:32.
    Quote Quote  
  22. Member
    Join Date: Jan 2014
    Location: UK
    Search Comp PM
    Hi guys. I'm on my phone atm, but when I get home to PC I will upload another clip from set 2 just I'm case the file your playing with has been modified without me remembering. I'm 99.5% sure it hasn't been modified though.
    As mentioned I want to make a movie of my child's 1st year with those clips. Oh how I wish I knew then what I know now and had bought a HD cam instead. The clips I have though fall into 2 sets. The first set of 20 clips contain the 640x480 versions, and the 2nd set of about 10 clips contain the 720x480 clips (not sure about the pixel aspect ratios as a bit advanced for me). As mentioned initially I wasn't sure if they were all interlaced or progressive. I was rather hoping to make the movie in Premiere Elements in a 640x480 (progressive) square pixel project (same as the majority of the clips) and hoping Premiere Elements would automatically correct the clips from set 2 to fit in the project, with me scaling all the clips to the same 480 height and trimming the sides off the clips in set 2.
    Quote Quote  
  23. Banned
    Join Date: Oct 2004
    Location: New York, US
    Search Comp PM
    I suspect something has gone amiss in the preparation of these samples. How were they made? If they were done in Premiere Elements, they've been re-encoded with faulty settings. I'd ask the O.P. to ask how better samples can be prepared in VirtualDub without screwing up something. As they are, they're impossible to work with.
    Last edited by sanlyn; 19th Mar 2014 at 09:32.
    Quote Quote  
  24. Member
    Join Date: Jan 2014
    Location: UK
    Search Comp PM
    Hi sanlyn, and thanks for the advice.

    I'm 99.5% sure they are original untouched out of the camera video clips. I will check when i get home, but right now i have zero memory of ever doing anything to any of the clips. I will upload another sample from the set just to be sure.

    I'm quite good at post processing photo's (Lightroom, photoshop etc), but just a beginner with video. I have to admit that all this video talk here is a bit beyond my understanding atm, pixel aspect ratios etc, etc, so please forgive my current ignorance, lol. I so want to learn though as its fascinating and must be a great feeling to be able to understand any video clip and correct it as needed.
    Quote Quote  
  25. Member
    Join Date: Jun 2012
    Location: USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
    But playback of emilyjersey.mkv in MPC-BE, VLC, and VirtualDub has duplicate frames.
    Yes it does. Given that the playback rates in the original VFR files show 26.12 and 25.29 with 15-30 allowable, and given the shaky camera, 29.97 seemed a reasonable "quick" solution that looked no worse than the original.

    (These numbers come from a .mov wrapped demuxed, header-stripped version of the video.)
    Last edited by smrpix; 8th Jan 2014 at 12:39.
    Quote Quote  
  26. Member
    Join Date: Jan 2014
    Location: UK
    Search Comp PM
    P.s I'm not especially interested in being able to play the finished movie on a DVD or Blu-ray player, but if it does then even better. It's more a case of making a video that can be watched back on a PC, and maybe in years to come re-opened in another application for whatever reason comes along.

    Therefore i was thinking of exporting to AVC at 640x480p (square pixels (god i love square pixels as so much easier to understand for a photographer, lol))
    Quote Quote  
  27. Banned
    Join Date: Oct 2004
    Location: New York, US
    Search Comp PM
    Considering different frame sizes, etc., square-pixel clips is likely the better choice. As for players, some BluRays might handle it properly as mkv (mine did), but some will not.

    The attached Jersey mkv has repaired levels and shadow detail, with help from a contrast mask in Avisynth and to gradation curves and levels filters in VirtualDub. Revealing some shadow detail also revealed noise "down there", some of which was denoised mildly (you can see it in the boy's dark trousers). At 24FPS with dupes removed things go fairly smoothly at the start, but it gets really twitchy about halfway through and very tricky at the end. I repaired 4 of those frames with interpolation, but even with dupe frames the effect was exactly the same except that the former dupes caused stutter while the missing frames caused jerks. The audio was resampled for AVC/DVD standards using VirtualDub and encoded to AC3 with TMPGenc Mastering Works. If you keep the dupe frames, this clip would look really weird.
    Last edited by sanlyn; 19th Mar 2014 at 09:32.
    Quote Quote  
  28. Member
    Join Date: Sep 2007
    Location: Canada
    Search Comp PM
    For whatever reason, certain decoders and splitters and various software seem to have problems with these clips

    AVISource() with any decoder returns the correct number of frames, but with duplicates : 1961 frames, about every 6th frame duplicated in the Jersey clip. Choppy motion

    FFVideoSource() drops frames 1733 unique frames, 26.51 FPS in the Jersey clip

    DirectShowSource() + ffdshow directshow for mjpeg seems to work correctly with unique frames , it doesn't clamp YUV levels either (some decoders like picvideo do) , and you can salvage some shadow detail. 1961 unique frames, 30.0003 FPS in the Jersey clip . Smooth motion . I normally hate DSS, but it works in this case

    I don't have elements , but it might be mishandling the clips as well
    Last edited by poisondeathray; 8th Jan 2014 at 13:45.
    Quote Quote  
  29. Banned
    Join Date: Oct 2004
    Location: New York, US
    Search Comp PM
    I didn't try DirectShowSource (got pretty impatient after I saw FFMS2 cut the movies in half). Will give it a try later and should enable ffdhow's MJPEG dcoder (I believe PicVideo's, is active on my PC, in VirtualDub anyway. I don't even know where that one came from!). Thanks for your input. I always learn something when you show up.
    Last edited by sanlyn; 19th Mar 2014 at 09:32.
    Quote Quote  
  30. Member
    Join Date: Sep 2007
    Location: Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Looks like I was wrong. The last bit of the clip is just repeated with DSS (you have to check linearly since it's not frame accurate, and everything up to frame 1732 matches with FFMS2). FFVideoSource looks like it's handling it correctly. I believe that "off" framerate is correct for that motion
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads