Is Progressive nateraly better than Interlaced?

[Trenton_Net]

Hi,

I was wondering if anyone could tell me if Progressive video has nateraly better quality than Interlaced? I have the option to leave video as internaced for playback on my SVCD player, and in comparison, I could make the source progressive at the same framerate for playback.

So, without using 3:2 Pulldown (to keep framerates and bitrates even), should I expect nateraly better looking video from interlaced or Progressive encodes?

[scissors]

Hi,

I was wondering if anyone could tell me if Progressive video has nateraly better quality than Interlaced? I have the option to leave video as internaced for playback on my SVCD player, and in comparison, I could make the source progressive at the same framerate for playback.

So, without using 3:2 Pulldown (to keep framerates and bitrates even), should I expect nateraly better looking video from interlaced or Progressive encodes?

From my understanding interlacing is used because of old video techniques (ie 2 heads on a video drum, spinning 50 times pers sec, merged to make a 25fps frame)

this is tied up with scanlines etc on the Tv.

I don't think it makes a major difference, interlacing i'd guess isn't as sharp because you are merging two frames, whereas progressive may appear slightly jerky.

It's academic when you're whating on a TV, six foot away. You tell us - do you notice significant quality differences?

BTW you can see the effects of interlacing/progressive by playing with virtualdub's de-interlacing options.

Good Question.

[scissors]

i forgot to mention - it's often prefered to take 29fps interlaced film and to force film to 23fps with pulldown purely to squeeze for seconds into the mpeg.

I'm sure you already do this

I also /think/ interlaced mpeg produce larger files. I'm guessing the source is more "complicated"

maybe this also effects the quality. But not so much as other variables (bit rate/frame size etc)

[Spicuzza]

It depends on the target playback device. Link below has good info.

http://www.ulead.com/learning/video3/page1.htm

[Sulik]

Typically, progressive content (deinterlaced) encodes better with MPEG compression (less high-frequency information).
However, at a high enough bitrate, capturing interlaced will lead to better results, especially with a good deinterlacer.

[SatStorm]

A general rule is:

- For TV better is interlace
- For Monitor better is progressive

Interlace looks horrible on Monitors. You can judge only on TV screen!