Xtasy Everything - Interlacing artifacts?

[Tiernan]

I've been capturing with this card for about a year now, and have used just about every (s)vcd-related format and capture possible - most often using VirtualDub (since it seems to allow for the greatest flexibility and options) BUT... one thing that I've noticed is that, on almost any capture (above 240/288 lines, of course), regardless of bitrate, codec (USUALLY PICVideo) or encoding program (TMPeg or CCE) the resulting MPG, when burned to SVCD, has horrible motion artifacts (when viewed on a standard TV) that SEEM to be related to the video interlacing, which, as I understand, should NOT be showing up when the SVCD is played on the TV. Is this a problem that other Xtasy Everything owners have had, or is there SOMEThing about how I'm capturing or processing that is creating these constant motion artifact problems?

(more details on request)

[DJRumpy]

You should make sure your field order is correct. Get it wrong, and it can make combing affects more obvious. This setting should be in whatever MPEG encoder your using. You should also check your source to see if it can be inverse telecined to remove the interlaced frames. This will eliminate them entirely from your MPEG output.

The reason you don't see the affect below 240/288 lines, is because the reduction to those sizes, affectively removes one field from your video, deinterlacing it as a byproduct.

[Xtasy2002]

I've been capturing with this card for about a year now, most often using VirtualDub capture (above 240/288 lines, regardless of bitrate, codec (USUALLY PICVideo) or encoding program (TMPeg or CCE) the resulting MPG, when burned to SVCD, has horrible motion artifacts (when viewed on a standard TV) that SEEM to be related to the video interlacing, which, as I understand, should NOT be showing up when the SVCD is played on the TV. Is this a problem that other Xtasy Everything owners have had

OK what I can tell you is that I also have captured with the Xtasy Everything for a while now (almost a year). I too use Virtual Dub to capture. I capture using both Picvideo and Huffyuv. I use TMPGEnc to encode. And I go anywhere from 2000 bitrate up to 6000. The difference between you and me is my final encodes go to DVD format, not SVCD.

I don't know exactly what 'motion artifacts' are by your explaination. What I can tell you is that the end results of my capture/encodes are nearly perfect every time. So I don't think it's your card at all since I capture with the same card, same software in the capture and encode process. I'm using Windows 2000 BTW.

One thing I know for sure is there will always be 'Macro Blocks' when you encode video that has high motion and you don't give it enough bitrate. Since I often encode at low bitrate (2000) this would be a problem in my video. But I fixed it checking the box 'Soften Block Noise' in TMPGEnc. You might try it for your encodes, it works with SVCD also. It's in the advanced TMPGEnc encode settings under the Quantize Matrix tab, click soften block noise and set to 35/35. Also be sure you use high quality (slow) in TMPGEnc.

I don't know what the settings are for CCE but I am sure that encoding with too low of a bitrate in CCE will also result in macro blocks.

[Tiernan]

Thanks for your information guys...

As far as the field order is concerned, I've let TmpegEnc figure it out, and assumed that it was correct. From what I've read here, that IS the best way to determine field order, yes?

As far as "Soften block noise" in TmpegEnc is concerned, I have it set at 55 (which was suggested as an optimal setting for that option.) I did a test encode today (using 2520/3000/2000 - 2 Pass/padding NOT enabled-highest quality) and it turned out... ok, but I am still getting some of what I described as artifacts - that is, during fast motion, elements sort of "shimmer" (stepping through it frame by frame seems to show macroblocking at its worst during those moments), so as I type this, I'm going to try another run with the same clip at 3000/6000/2000 and see if this makes a difference. Given how well SVCD CAN represent this data, I couldn't help but think that bitrate at the above settings should be sufficient to render this material (BTW, encoding from PAL colour 25 fps 704X576 to PAL colour 25fps 352X576 - CVD standard) with the idea to fit approx. 50 mins. on an 80 min. CVD.

Unfortunately, if "soften block noise" is going to be required to render most anything with high motion, then I don't believe CCE is going to work very well, given that it doesn't have that option....

Any other suggestions?

[Xtasy2002]

First thing first, go thru the video you captured directly in picvideo (as an .avi I assume). Open that in Virtual Dub (File/Open) and go frame by frame through this video. Does the original come out clean and crisp?

If the original captured video is clean and doesn't have the error then you know the problem is in your encoding steps. You have to try and fine tune that process.

If the original captured video isn't clean then the encoding isn't the problem at all. Look to see what quality setting you have picvideo codec set to and make sure it's at least quality 19.

[DJRumpy]

Tiernan, CCE doesn't suffer as badly from macroblocks like TMPGenc does. It's less likely to macroblock during these scenes. I'm getting confused here though. Are you having a macroblock problem, or a motion blur problem? The two are unrelated, and look very different. The fact that your half height captures do not suffer from this indicates interlacing artifacts, and not macroblocking.

As for field order, you should verify it. You only need to do it once. It never changes as long as you use the same capture device. Adam has a nice method. You can find it here: https://www.videohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=462635&highlight=field+order+tmpgenc+dei...terlace#462635

Also make sure your not trying to deinterlace an interlaced source. The methods you use can cause a motion blur as an artifact from the process. If your source is true interlaced, then leave it that way. If it's telecined, then you should inverse telecine it first. Find more info here: www.lukesvideo.com

Check the Telecine section.

[Tiernan]

DJ,
I've checked (especially by CHANGING the field order) and the difference is VERY obvious when you have the wrong order. In my case, that doesnt seem to be the problem.

I AM getting macroblocking, though it really mostly shows up when stepping through the converted MPG frame by frame (in high motion segments, of course) That macroblocking seems to show up (in real time playback) as a sort of "shimmering" on objects in motion (not sure how else to describe it)

I assume that, when referring to "half height" captures, you mean the one-field only caps, right? No, on those caps, there is no problem with the apparent interlacing artifacts, so you're probably right there. But still, that's only half the picture information too....

Perhaps what I should ask about now is: what should be the optimal TMPEG/CCE settings for 352X576 25fps PAL VT-sourced MPG encodes? Is there some special settings that are more appropriate for this material?

Thanks for your continued assistance here...

[DJRumpy]

I don't suppose there's any way you can post a small sample, or even a screen capture of what your describing?

On the issue of macroblocking, use multipass VBR. Set the AVG according to the length, and number of media your storing it on. That way you can maximize the avg bitrate.

As for settings in TMPGenc, I don't know of any 'special' ones that will make everything alright. I'm assuming you are not using a deinterlace function (both your input and output are set to interlaced). The artifacts your describing are usually a result of deinterlacing a video. You get a motion blur because the to fields are merged into one. You end up with either a ghosting affect, since both fields are actaully two different snapshots in time, or if they blend the two fields together (think morphing), then you get a motion blur affect (think Star Trek, going to warp).

[Tiernan]

Thanks for your patience guys. I'm afraid I'd mostly given up on getting around this artifacting problem. My tendency has been to think that I'm just trying to put too little bitrate toward too lenthy a CVD.

As it happens, I'm on dialip- so I really don't see being able to post much of a video clip BUT, I can can post a screen cap so you can see what I've been seeing.


and



and



(This one's a quick pan right, for those who don't know MST3K)

I'll look around in the mean time for possible better examples of the problem.

Thanks for your help and patience!

[DJRumpy]

Unless something has changed, I don't think the BROWSE button works. You will have to post these somewhere on the web, and link to them.

[Baldrick]

Thanks for your patience guys. I'm afraid I'd mostly given up on getting around this artifacting problem. My tendency has been to think that I'm just trying to put too little bitrate toward too lenthy a CVD.

As it happens, I'm on dialip- so I really don't see being able to post much of a video clip BUT, I can can post a screen cap so you can see what I've been seeing.


and



I'll look around in the mean time for possible better examples of the problem.

Thanks for your help and patience!

You cannot have spaces in the filename. Rename the files and repost the images.

[DJRumpy]

Ahh.. so it does work. I always wondered about that. Do you still have to put only one image for the first post, and re-edit the post to attach more?